Chief Judge Janet DiFiore at the podium, flanked by members of the Court of Appeals and Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks. From left: Judges Rowan Wilson, Eugene Fahey, Jenny Rivera, Marks, DiFiore, Leslie Stein, Michael Garcia and Paul Feinman. (Photo: David Handschuh/NYLJ)Four-Judge Panels Reduce Chances of Cases Going to Court of Appeals
Four-judge panels are unfair to litigants because they reduce the chances of taking a case to the Court of Appeals: dissents by two out of four justices are simply harder to come by than dissents by two out of five.
March 11, 2019 at 11:29 AM
2 minute read
The report (March 6) that the short-handed Appellate Division, First Department, must begin using four-judge panels notes the possibility that this can result in tie votes. There is another concern as well.
Pursuant to CPLR § 5601(a) when two Justices dissent on a question of the law in a civil case the losing side has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeals–there is no need to make an application for leave to appeal.
I recall that a former member of the Second Department maintained that in view of § 5601(a) four-judge panels are unfair to litigants because they reduce the chances of taking a case to the Court of Appeals: dissents by two out of four Justices are simply harder to come by than dissents by two out of five.
Norman A. Olch is a member and former chair of the Committee on Courts of Appellate Jurisdiction of the New York State Bar Association.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
3 minute read
Letter to the Editor: Law Journal Used Misleading Photo for Article on Election Observers
1 minute read
NYC's Administrative Court's to Publish Some Rulings in the New York Law Journal Is Welcomed. But It Should Go Further
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 13rd Circuit Strikes Down NLRB’s Monetary Remedies for Fired Starbucks Workers
- 2Latest Class of Court Officers Sworn into Service in New York
- 3Kirkland's Daniel Lavon-Krein: Staying Ahead of Private Equity Consolidation
- 4Many Southeast Law Firms Planned New, Smaller Offices in 2024
- 5On the Move and After Hours: Goldberg Segalla, Faegre Drinker, Pashman Stein
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
