While the first question most, if not all, New York litigators ask when evaluating a new complaint filed against their corporate clients is whether there is a viable motion to dismiss,  all too often that question focuses on the merits of the case. A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim can result in complete dismissal of some cases and force plaintiffs to replead other claims, but it frequently requires the defense to spend a significant amount of money on attorneys’ fees for, at best, a dismissal without prejudice.

In today’s business climate with clients continuing to look for ways to minimize litigation costs, the reluctance to fund a low percentage pre-answer motion is increasing. If litigation remains inevitable, many corporate decision-makers prefer to pursue the less costly route of answering and focus on ways to defend the merits cost effectively.  Recent developments in jurisdictional jurisprudence warrant rethinking this approach.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]