Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates
P.C.
75 Ponce De Leon Ave NE Ste 101
Atlanta,
GA 30308(470) 294-1674
www.garymartinhays.com
By John L.A. Lyddane | November 18, 2024
Here we examine some of the concerns for the defense of medical malpractice cases when an issue arises as to the use of a prior inconsistent statement at trial.
By Emily Saul | October 9, 2024
The case was tried by Thomas Moore and Judy Livingston of Kramer Dillof Livingston & Moore.
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier | September 30, 2024
"A decedent's emotional distress from the fear of impending death is very much a compensable aspect of post-injury pain and suffering," write Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier.
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By John L. A. Lyddane | September 16, 2024
"Two related purposes of issue preclusion are to ensure finality of decisions and to avoid inconsistent adjudications of identical issues," writes John L. A. Lyddane.
New York Law Journal | Analysis
By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier | August 8, 2024
"The statute begins to run under the discovery rule not when the patient was diagnosed with cancer, but when patient knew ... that there was negligence," write Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier.
By ALM Staff | July 30, 2024
This ruling was selected and summarized by the New York Law Journal's decisions editors.
By ALM Staff | July 24, 2024
This ruling was selected and summarized by the New York Law Journal's decisions editors.
By Alan W. Clark | July 19, 2024
Judiciary Law section 474-a, as amended effective July 1, 1985 sets forth a contingency fee schedule and provision for application for increased fee in extraordinary circumstances. In practice, the fee schedule creates inherent conflict, is unfair and deprives many victims of malpractice the opportunity to hire competent counsel. Applications for enhanced fees are rarely granted. The proposed Amendment set forth in NYAB 7448 provides much needed changes to the Statute.
By John Lyddane | July 18, 2024
Cumulative testimony is generally excluded at trial based upon the sound discretion of the trial court, whose obligation it is to control the presentation of the issues to the trier of fact. This scenario arises in cases that involve expert witnesses from multiple specialties but may also occur when there are one or more missing witnesses.
By Brian Lee | July 5, 2024
A 5-0 ruling, authored by Justice Christine Clark, of the Appellate Division, Third Department, said a trial judge should have greenlighted expert testimony on the standard of care.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers and financiers for the real estate healthcare event of the year!
This event shines a spotlight on how individuals and firms are changing the investment advisory industry where it matters most.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
We are seeking two attorneys with a minimum of two to three years of experience to join our prominent and thriving education law practice in...
Description: Fox Rothschild has an opening in the New York office for a Real Estate Litigation Associate with three to six years of commerci...
Downtown NY property and casualty defense law firm seeks a Litigation Associate with 3+ years' experience to become a part of our team! You ...