Thomas F Gleason

November 29, 2011 | Legaltech News

Attorney Thomas F. Gleason examines a case in New York to determine just how far a non-party must go to comply with a subpoena for the disclosure of electronically stored information.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

November 19, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea, writes that appeals of interlocutory orders to the Appellate Division are liberally permitted under CPLR 5701(a), a real benefit when an important matter needs review prior to final judgment, but, he notes, it often is unnecessary to take such an appeal.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

November 29, 2011 | Corporate Counsel

It must be hard to be a computer network professional. You're responsible to maintain security, you have little or no control over what people send and receive from the computers you maintain, and you may be the only person with the technical knowledge and access to identify the source and availability of electronically stored information.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

July 16, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason. a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea, analyzes a recent appellate decision holding that affirmations containing electronic signatures will suffice to meet the "subscribing" requirement of CPLR §2106.

By Thomas F. Gleason

9 minute read

November 21, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea analyzes a case in which a plaintiff trying to identify someone who allegedly defamed her online using an NYU computer moved to hold the university in contempt after it asserted the identity of the poster was not available even though plaintiff's expert said forensic software could recover it.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

September 19, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Patrick M. Connors, an associate professor at Albany Law School, and Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea and an adjunct professor at Albany Law School, discuss how a lawyer in civil litigation can maintain attorney-client protections while avoiding sanctions herself if she learns the client's representations in disclosure were inaccurate.

By Patrick M. Connors and Thomas F. Gleason

10 minute read

March 16, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea and an adjunct professor at Albany Law School, writes that to fairly calculate future damages in a wrongful death claim, one must discount a series of future losses to their "present value" as of the date of death, and then add interest from the date of death to the date of judgment. This is not as simple as it sounds, as seen in a recent Court of Appeals case.

By Thomas F. Gleason

9 minute read

July 15, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason is a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea, discusses two new proposals that would make protective orders under CPLR 3103 available to non-parties "about whom" discovery is sought and would keep certain private information, such as social security numbers, out of filed court papers.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

November 23, 2011 | Texas Lawyer

It must be hard to be a computer network professional. You're responsible to maintain security, you have little or no control over what people send and receive from the computers you maintain, and you may be the only person with the technical knowledge and access to identify the source and availability of electronically stored information. I imagine these folks hate subpoenas, especially if they have nothing to do with their employer's business.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

November 21, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea and an adjunct professor at Albany Law School, and Patrick M. Connors, an associate professor at Albany Law School, write that whether originally misguided or fundamentally correct, the rule intended to prevent the disclosure of the identity of medical malpractice expert witnesses until trial has been compromised by commonly available search engine and database technology. What should be done now?

By Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors

12 minute read