By Jacqueline Thomsen | February 11, 2020
Lawyers for Ackerman McQueen have gone to three federal courts to challenge what it describes as "harassing" subpoenas issued by the NRA.
By Jacqueline Thomsen | February 10, 2020
"Stone's criminal conduct was not an act of desperation," prosecutors wrote. "Rather, his conduct was undertaken purposefully, by someone who knew exactly what he was doing."
Connecticut Law Tribune | News
By Robert Storace | February 10, 2020
Jon Schoenhorn, attorney for Michelle Troconis who has been implicated in the disappearance of Jennifer Dulos, said the media coverage has been intense.
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By Michael Hoenig | February 7, 2020
In his Complex Litigation column, Michael Hoenig discusses the hearsay rule and some of its exceptions, particularly focusing on the newly revised revised Rule 807, which is now seemingly more muscular than the old rule and may go from rare use to a thriving battlefront.
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By David B. Newman and Matthew L. Lippert | February 6, 2020
The intersection of specialized, often highly technical, or esoteric subject matter with procedural freedom can result in confusion about the ground rules for the use of experts in the arbitration.
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By Michael J. Hutter | February 5, 2020
There has been a spate of criticism of New York's excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule over the past 18 months, most recently in December 2019. In his Evidence column the author discusses those criticisms in detail and offers a recommendation for the courts and the Legislature regarding the future of the exception
The Legal Intelligencer | News
By Hannah Smith | February 4, 2020
A shopping cart's tracks through liquid on the floor of a supermarket may be enough to establish knowledge of a dangerous slip-and-fall condition.
By Charles Toutant | February 4, 2020
In a cautionary tale of expert testimony that did more harm than good, the appeals court said the trial judge erred by allowing a professional engineer to testify at trial about circumstances at homes he didn't inspect.
By Tom McParland | February 3, 2020
Asked whether he would assist the government's investigation, Lev Parnas said it was a "good question."
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier | February 3, 2020
The theory behind the common law "emergency doctrine" is that a person in such a situation cannot reasonably be held to the same accuracy of judgment or conduct as someone who has an opportunity to reflect, even if the decision turns out to be wrong. The need for the emergency doctrine has been called into question in recent years based on principles of comparative negligence and the ability of juries to apportion fault. As Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier discuss in this edition of their Medical Malpractice column, while some states have abolished the doctrine altogether, New York has not gone so far.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Law.com celebrates the California law firms and legal departments driving the state's dynamic legal landscape.
The Texas Lawyer honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in Texas.
CORE RESPONSIBILITIES AND TASKS: Reporting to the Senior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer &...
Yale New Haven Health seeks a dynamic and collaborative executive to serve as its Vice President, Labor Strategy and Senior Associate Genera...
Nestled in the heart of Northern California Wine Country, Sonoma County is the largest county in the North Bay region of the San Francisco B...