Filter This View

  • Commonwealth v. Wright

    Publication Date: 2020-01-06
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1512

    Under the totality of the circumstances, police officers had reasonable suspicion to believe that defendant was armed and dangerous such that they could remove him from his vehicle to conduct a pat-down; therefore, the trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence. The appellate court affirmed.

  • Evans v. Travelers Ins. Co.

    Publication Date: 2019-12-23
    Practice Area: Insurance Law
    Industry: Insurance
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1486

    Trial court erred in granting insurer summary judgment where there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether plaintiff's emotional injuries were caused by physical injuries she suffered in a motor vehicle accident, thereby entitling her to first-party benefits, or were caused solely by the accident. Order of the trial court reversed and remanded.

  • A.Y. v. Janssen Pharm. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-12-16
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1437

    The appellate court refused to disturb a $70 million verdict awarded to a young man suffering from gynecomastia, i.e., the enlargement or swelling of breast tissue in males, as a result of taking defendants' pharmaceutical product since the verdict was not inconsistent with the evidence of his suffering due to the social consequences of his severe and permanent disfigurement. The appellate court affirmed in relevant part.

  • Commonwealth v. Sexton

    Publication Date: 2019-11-11
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1318

    Evidence was sufficient to support witness intimidation, terroristic threats, and stalking conviction where commonwealth was not required to provide expert testimony to authenticate threatening graffiti was written by defendant where content, location, and timing of graffiti sufficient to find that defendant was the author. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

  • Commonwealth v. Meredith

    Publication Date: 2019-10-28
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1259

    The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the victim's teenage son competent to testify as a witness since the issue of whether he had the ability to correctly recall the events at issue was a question of credibility for the jury. The appellate court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    New York Employment Law 2023

    Authors: Daniel A. Cohen, Joshua Feinstein

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Commonwealth v. Brogdon

    Publication Date: 2019-10-14
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1202

    Motion to suppress correctly denied where police had probable cause to arrest defendant as a suspect in an unrelated crime and therefore could search defendant incident to the arrest. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

  • Commonwealth v. Chimenti

    Publication Date: 2019-09-23
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1110

    Defendant failed to demonstrate that his untimely Post Conviction Relief Act petition was subject to the governmental interference exception to the timeliness requirements since the purported plea agreement he relied upon and sought to enforce had already been declared void by the state's high court. The appellate court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.

  • Commonwealth v. Clemat

    Publication Date: 2019-09-23
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1108

    In this criminal case involving drug-related charges, the trial court did not err in denying defendant's request to strike for cause a juror whose close friend had recently died of a drug overdose but said she remained a fair and impartial juror, as the trial judge was in the best position to assess the juror's credibility and fitness to serve. The appellate court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.

  • Commonwealth v. Marrero

    Publication Date: 2019-09-09
    Practice Area: Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-1055

    The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to excuse a juror during defendant's trial as the record supported the court's credibility determination that this juror expressed no racial bias toward the defendant when she commented about the existence of a jury of his peers. The appellate court affirmed defendant's judgment of sentence.

  • Nazarak v. Waite

    Publication Date: 2019-08-19
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Construction
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0979

    Appellants appealed the jury finding and award of damages in favor of plaintiff in plaintiff's action arising from a vehicle collision and the court found trial court properly held that workers' compensation was not a collateral source, the admission of evidence of plaintiff's compromise and release with regard to his workers' compensation claim was not reversible error and plaintiff's vocational expert did not testify outside the scope of her report. Affirmed.