Steven J Ahmuty Jr

March 05, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, review the harmless error doctrine, judicial recognition that "[a]bsolute perfection in trials will not be attained so long as human beings conduct them."

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

13 minute read

April 28, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, write that the Appellate Division, Second Department, recently addressed the issue of the appealability of an order deciding a pretrial motion in limine. The court held that an order "made in advance of trial which merely determine[s] the admissibility of evidence is an unappealable advisory ruling," but "an order which limits the scope of issues to be tried is appealable."

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

8 minute read

October 06, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, write that, in a civil action, when the Appellate Division has ruled against you (and you have not garnered two dissents in your favor on a question of law), CPLR5602[a] provides two alternate ways by which you may seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from a final order or judgment of the Appellate Division.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr.

11 minute read

October 14, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, review the effects of a relevant change in the law during the pendency of an appeal, after the time to appeal an order called into question has expired but before the case has been finally resolved, and after a judgment is entered and no appeal is pending.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

10 minute read

April 05, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, write that the concepts of "appealability" and "reviewability" are different, especially in Court of Appeals practice. With that in mind, they review a case where in which a single Judge of the Court of Appeals granted the appellant's motion for leave to appeal, thereby satisfying the appealability criterion.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

10 minute read

November 01, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, write that no lower court may take any action inconsistent with the remittitur of the Court of Appeals. When all that remains to be done is a ministerial act, it is error for the lower courts to grant a motion to vacate the judgment and for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence or any other theory that an imaginative attorney may devise to forestall the inevitable.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

8 minute read

April 18, 2003 | Law.com

While the U.S. Supreme Court in State Farm pointedly declined the opportunity to set an absolute constitutional limit on punitive damage awards, its holding that "single-digit multipliers are more likely to comport with due process," and in some cases a punitive award should not exceed a compensatory award at all, provides the clearest guidance to date concerning the permissible size of punitive damages.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

11 minute read

October 04, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, write that the U.S. Supreme Court will consider later this month whether a jury may award punitive damages to punish a defendant for the effects of its conduct on non-parties and whether an appellate court's conclusion that a defendant's conduct was highly reprehensible can override the "ratio" guidepost for determining whether a punitive award is so excessive as to violate due process.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

13 minute read

September 07, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, discuss appeals as of right, the requirements that the dissent of two Appellate Division justices must be on a question of law and in favor of the appellant, and whether, once the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction, the appellant is limited to arguing for reversal or modification on only those questions of law on which the two dissenters voted in its favor.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

13 minute read

December 03, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Thomas R. Newman, of counsel to Duane Morris, and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr., a partner at Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, write that unlike federal practice which discourages appeals from interlocutory decisions and, with few exceptions, requires permission of both the U.S. district court and the U.S. court of appeals, New York's civil practice generously allows appeals as of right to be taken to the appellate division from interlocutory judgments and a great many intermediate orders, so long as the order sought to be appealed decided a motion that was made upon notice in an action originating in the supreme court or a county court.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty Jr.

9 minute read