0 results for 'Riker Danzig'
Fireman's Fund Insurance Company v. Imbesi,
Where plaintiff settled her sexual-harassment complaint against her employer for $4.15 million, and the settlement provided for judgment in favor of plaintiff in exchange for $1 million and assignment of defendants' claims against the nonsettling insurers, and none of the settlement of $4.15 million was attributable to punitive damages, the trial judge's finding that the overall settlement was unreasonable, collusive and unenforceable against the nonsettling insurer is affirmed.What's New in Agency Practice? Most Everything
Administrative practice can be far from sexy work. But lawyers who represent clients subject to official regulation -- from government workers in disputes with personnel agencies to tavern owners trying to get liquor licenses -- are niche practitioners of the most specialized sort. Those niches are undergoing exciting changes.Scandals Eclipse An Eventful Year
The medical malpractice mess. The advent of limited licenses for corporate counsel. The rise of technology in the courts. The fall of state revenue for legal programs. The ebb and flow of New Jersey's legal economy. All were developments worthy of analysis. But they lacked the drama - perhaps the long-term political significance - of the governor's announcement that he was gay and had an adulterous affair with another man, or the subsequent disclosure of an impending sexual harassment suit against him.N.Y. Panel Backs N.J. Law for Insurance Dispute
A Manhattan appellate court has ruled that New Jersey law should apply instead of New York law in determining the amount of a company's excess insurance coverage for defending and paying asbestos-related personal injury claims. The decision of the Appellate Division, 1st Department, last week was based on the premise that the state of an insured company's "principal place of business takes precedence over the state of incorporation."In re G-I Holdings, Inc., et al,
The motion of the legal representative of present and future asbestos-related demands in this bankruptcy action for authority to intervene as co-plaintiff in a District Court action brought by the committee of asbestos claimants to avoid a stock transfer to the debtor's principal shareholder is granted; the legal representative is "a party in interest" under 11 U.S.C. � 1109(b), and the right to intervene applies beyond the main bankruptcy case; however, it is for the District Court to determine whetherCherry Hill Manor Associates v. Faugno et al
Third-party defendant-attorneys can not be considered joint tortfeasors with defendant-attorney because their alleged malpractice constituted separate torts at disparate times over a six-year period, and thus can not constitute the "joint liability" required for the imposition of contribution liability under the JTCL; moreover, defendant may not seek contribution against them under the JTCL because the injury they inflicted is not the "same injury" as the one he subsequently inflicted.Smith v. American Home Products Corp. et al
The HIPAA does not pre-empt the informal discovery techniques approved in Stempler, and ex parte interviews of plaintiffs' treating physicians may proceed as permitted under that case subject to the court's discretion regarding the appropriateness of such interviews in particular cases; since the current medical disclosure authorizations fall below HIPAA requirements, the matter is referred to the Civil Practice Committee for its consideration of drafting HIPAA-compliant sample forms.In re Adoption of N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.13
N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.13, which sets minimum ground water and surface water remediation standards for the cleanup of contaminated property under all New Jersey environmental remediation laws, does not violate the Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation Act by applying pre-existing ground water standards instead of promulgating new, less stringent, site-specific standards.Trending Stories
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
Leveraging Technology to Improve Employee Engagement and Client Satisfaction
Brought to you by CARET Legal
Download Now
How to Choose Your Legal Operations Software: Key Considerations and Expert Tips
Brought to you by DiliTrust
Download Now
Yearly Roundup: Strategic Insights for Law Firm Decision Making
Brought to you by CARET Legal
Download Now
Lex Machina Contracts: Commercial Litigation Report 2024
Brought to you by LexisNexis®
Download Now