NEXT

Thomas F Gleason

Thomas F Gleason

March 21, 2011 | New York Law Journal

The Separation of Powers: Foundation for Article 78 Deference

In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea, writes that flexible consideration of petitions for writ-type relief has not led to the development of liberal review by the courts on substantive matters.

By Thomas F. Gleason

8 minute read

March 20, 2006 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

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 of law at Albany Law School, write that insurance is the fuel that runs a good part of the litigation in this state, and when the proceeds of insurance are not available, plaintiffs may be unable to maintain a case regardless of its merit or the seriousness of the injuries.

By Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors

12 minute read

November 17, 2008 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea and an adjunct professor at Albany Law School, writes that the Legislature is about to open a new route for declaratory relief for personal injury plaintiffs confronted by a disclaimer of coverage by their defendant's liability insurer.

By Thomas F. Gleason

11 minute read

March 15, 2010 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea and an adjunct professor at Albany Law School, writes that a wrongful death claim must be maintained by the decedent's personal representative, but an infant cannot become a personal representative, and, where the sole distributee of the estate is an infant, nobody else may obtain letters of administration until a guardian for the infant is appointed.

By Thomas F. Gleason

9 minute read

November 20, 2006 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

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 of law at Albany Law School, propose that it may be appropriate to have a limited time period during which certain electronically filed papers, such as motions, are restricted in access to the court and the parties.

By Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors

12 minute read

July 16, 2007 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

Thomas F. Gleason, a member of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea and an adjunct professor at Albany Law School, writes that the Court of Appeals, in In the Matter of Eighth Judicial District Asbestos Litigation, provided a new disclosure obligation for high-low agreements between the plaintiff and less than all the defendants. The Court does not state the sanction in all cases for failing to abide by the new requirement, but the disposition in this case indicates that it is reversal of the judgment.

By Thomas F. Gleason

12 minute read

November 16, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Beam Up The E-Discovery, Scotty

In his E-Discovery column, Thomas F. Gleason of Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea discusses the surprisingly large burden and expense caused by producing electronic records in paper form, and suggests provisions for new policies in CPLR 3103.

By Thomas F. Gleason

9 minute read

July 21, 2005 | Legaltech News

E-Discovery Problems With Hard-Drive 'Clones'

While "cloning" a hard drive's data can be a simple operation, an e-discovery response still requires a content-based analysis to avoid inadvertent disclosure of confidential information. And the nature and manner of computer data storage can make it a severe burden that requires extensive -- and expensive -- professional judgment if a clone is to be safely delivered to a litigation adversary. Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors discuss these issues in the context of a nasty New York divorce case.

By Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors

10 minute read

March 19, 2009 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

Thomas F. Gleason, a partner in Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea, writes that CPLR 4545 originally was enacted in response to the medical malpractice insurance crisis, and was designed to reduce insurance premiums by excising from the tort judgment collateral source payments, such as health insurance benefits a tort plaintiff received, thereby reducing tort recoveries paid by malpractice liability insurers. CPLR 4545 still is creating problems, however, and the nature of the problems requires consideration of the doctrine of equitable subrogation, which the Court of Appeals recently had occasion to do so in Fasso v. Doerr.

By Thomas F. Gleason

10 minute read

March 21, 2005 | New York Law Journal

New York Practice

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 of law at the school, consider Civil Practice Law and Rules 4545, a statute that continues to complicate tort actions over 25 years after its enactment.

By Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors

16 minute read


More from ALM