Steven J Ahmuty Jr

May 06, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. write: Stare decisis is not an inflexible rule. While the doctrine is not to be lightly cast aside, a court should not hesitate to overrule its precedents "when persuaded by the 'lessons of experience and the force of better reasoning.'"

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

12 minute read

May 05, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. write: Stare decisis is not an inflexible rule. While the doctrine is not to be lightly cast aside, a court should not hesitate to overrule its precedents "when persuaded by the 'lessons of experience and the force of better reasoning.'"

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

12 minute read

March 04, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. analyze the U.S. Supreme Court's recent holding in 'Gelboim v. Bank of America' that a district court order dismissing the sole claim in a single-claim action that has been consolidated with other multiple-claim actions in multidistrict litigation is immediately appealable as a "final" order, even if claims remain unresolved in other consolidated actions in the MDL.

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

8 minute read

March 03, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. analyze the U.S. Supreme Court's recent holding in 'Gelboim v. Bank of America' that a district court order dismissing the sole claim in a single-claim action that has been consolidated with other multiple-claim actions in multidistrict litigation is immediately appealable as a "final" order, even if claims remain unresolved in other consolidated actions in the MDL.

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

8 minute read

January 07, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. write: Frivolous appeals impose a substantial and costly burden on courts and respondents, and judicial resources should not be diverted to the processing and disposition of such appeals or motions. To discourage such misconduct, appellate courts will not hesitate to award costs and impose sanctions in appropriate cases.

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

12 minute read

January 06, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. write: Frivolous appeals impose a substantial and costly burden on courts and respondents, and judicial resources should not be diverted to the processing and disposition of such appeals or motions. To discourage such misconduct, appellate courts will not hesitate to award costs and impose sanctions in appropriate cases.

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

12 minute read

November 05, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. review the Second Circuit's recent decision in 'Acumen Re Management Corp. v. General Security National Insurance Co.,' which contains a very informative analysis of the "multiple claims" requirement for partial final judgments pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

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

11 minute read

September 03, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. examine 'Reis v. Volvo,' which was appealed as of right based on two dissents in the Appellate Division on a question of law in favor of the appellant. Although the Court of Appeals disagreed with the Appellate Division dissent concerning the impropriety of one aspect of the jury instructions, it nevertheless reversed and ordered a new trial on the basis of its further disagreement with the majority concerning another aspect of the charge.

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

11 minute read

July 02, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Appellate Practice column, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. discuss the Court of Appeals' decision in 'People v. Finch,' which represents an intriguing example of the schism between the judges who believe that the court's stringent preservation jurisprudence must ultimately serve the ends of justice and those who believe that strict adherence to the preservation requirement accomplishes that very purpose, especially with the Appellate Division's interest of justice jurisdiction as a fail-safe.

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

10 minute read

May 15, 2014 | Commercial Litigation Insider

In their Appellate Practice column for the New York Law Journal, Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr. discuss the rules and procedures of the pre-argument conference, which can help participants more objectively evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of their case; generate new ideas and options for settlement; reduce tensions between the participants; deal with procedural problems; and eliminate or clarify issues.

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

8 minute read