NEXT
Sign in to follow
Search Results

0 results for 'Bressler Amery Ross'

You can use to get even better search results
May 19, 2003 |

Aly v. E.S. Sutton Realty et al, etc.,

Here, where a Pennsylvania insurance company authorized to offer commercial general-liability insurance policies in New Jersey was placed into rehabilitation by a Pennsylvania court, which also ordered a stay of all proceedings in Pennsylvania "or elsewhere" against the company and against all its insureds for 90 days, which stay was extended numerous times, principles of comity dictate that New Jersey trial courts honor the initial stay for rehabilitation and that they continue to honor the extensions i
14 minute read
July 24, 2006 |

N.J. Mergers & Acquisitions

Mergers and acquisitions involving N.J. companies.
2 minute read
June 23, 2003 |

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Cybergenics Corporation v. Chinery, etc., et al,

Bankruptcy courts may authorize creditors' committees to sue derivatively to avoid fraudulent transfers for the benefit of the estate; Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Union Planters Bank, a Chapter 7 case that interpreted the text of 11 U.S.C. � 506(c) to foreclose anyone other than a trustee from seeking to recover administrative costs on its own behalf, does not operate to prevent the Bankruptcy Court from authorizing such suits; the judgment of the District Court is reversed.
8 minute read
May 02, 2005 |

ARCNET Architects, Inc. v. New Jersey Property-Liability Insurance Guaranty Association

Pursuant to the 2004 amendment to the Property-Liability Insurance Guaranty Association Act that clarified the definition of "covered claims," attorneys' fees and other claim expenses incurred prior to the date of an insurance company's insolvency are not, and never have been, covered claims; thus, the attorneys' fees and other related claim expenses here, incurred before the amendment's effective date, are not payable by PLIGA.
7 minute read
January 21, 2005 |

In re Mercedes-Benz Antitrust Litigation

Where defendants moved for summary judgment and plaintiffs moved to strike affidavits filed in support of the motion because of defendants' failure to disclose affiants' identities (an officer for the corporation and an expert), or that they had knowledge of issues in support of the motion, defendants were required to disclose the identify of the officer but not the expert, and such failure was not harmless or justified; although the affidavit is not excluded, plaintiffs are given opportunity to depose him.
11 minute read

More from ALM

More from ALM

Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.

Resources

  • 2024 Report: State of AI in Legal

    Brought to you by Ironclad

    Download Now

  • Blueprint for Successful Second Request Document Review

    Brought to you by Integreon

    Download Now

  • Employee Happiness Playbook: The 3 R's for Business Success in 2024

    Brought to you by Amazing Workplace, Inc.

    Download Now

  • The Positive Impact of AI at Small Law Firms: 4 Key Insights

    Brought to you by LexisNexis®

    Download Now