Thomas R Newman

February 02, 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, examine two cases where the reporter's minutes of certain proceedings were lost and, so, never transcribed. Defendants sought reversal of convictions based on the loss of the trial minutes, or alternatively, a hearing at which the events of the untranscribed proceedings would be recreated, as far as possible.

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

14 minute read

December 07, 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 substantive provisions governing the stay of enforcement of an order or judgment pending appeal and the procedural requirements for bringing on an application for a stay in those instances where an automatic stay is not available and court-ordered relief is necessary.

By Thomas R. Newman and Steven J. Ahmuty

11 minute read

March 04, 2003 | New York Law Journal

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

10 minute read

February 06, 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 a recent decision holding that although a nonappealing party generally cannot be given the benefits of a coparty's appellate victory, a remaining defendant was not precluded from seeking renewal of its cross motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it based upon the Appellate Division's prior decision to grant dismissal of the complaint as to a codefendant.

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

9 minute read

August 14, 2007 | 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 concept of finality is intricate and confusing and probably the least well understood aspect of Court of Appeals' practice. Each year, the Court dismisses numerous appeals on the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the action or proceeding within the meaning of the state Constitution.

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

10 minute read

February 05, 2002 | New York Law Journal

CPLR 5526 prescribes the contents of the record on appeal. On an appeal from a final judgment, the record consists of the notice of appeal, the judgment-roll (see CPLR 5017[b]), the corrected transcript of the proceedings if a trial or hearing was held, any relevant exhibits, any other reviewable order (see CPLR 5501[a]), and any opinions in the case.

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

9 minute read

March 05, 2002 | New York Law Journal

U nder New York law, an order denying a motion for reargument of a prior motion is not appealable. A purported appeal from such an order will therefore be dismissed. Conversely, an order granting reargument is appealable, even though the court may adhere to its prior decision and the outcome is the same as though reargument had been denied. The difference between a motion for reargument and one for renewal is significant in terms of appellate consequences. An order denying a motion for renewal of a prior mo

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

8 minute read

April 24, 2003 | New York Law Journal

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

10 minute read

January 05, 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, in New York state practice, an order of the Supreme Court denying a motion for summary judgment is immediately appealable to the Appellate Division, as of right, by the unsuccessful movant. Finality is not required.

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

9 minute read

November 03, 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, examine Computech International, Inc. v. Compaq Computer Corp., which contains an excellent discussion of partial final judgments pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

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

10 minute read