THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK : NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL. -against- :
|
|
- Silvia Hunter
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DISTRICT COURT : COUNTY OF NASSAU FIRST DISTRICT PART DVM : HEMPSTEAD, NEW YORK X THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK : NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL -against- : DOMINIC BARBARA : Docket Numbers Defendant. : 2012NA NA NA NA X PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that on the annexed affirmation of Assistant District Attorney THERESA TEBBETT, duly affirmed on the 15 th day of March, 2013 the People will move this Court on April 2, 2013, before the Honorable Helen Voutsinas, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, for an order to disqualify counsel for the defendant. Respectfully submitted, KATHLEEN M. RICE DISTRICT ATTORNEY NASSAU COUNTY 99 Main Street Hempstead, NY By: Theresa Tebbett Assistant District Attorney Dated: March 15, 2013 Mineola, New York
2 DISTRICT COURT : COUNTY OF NASSAU FIRST DISTRICT PART DVM : HEMPSTEAD, NEW YORK X THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK : -against- : MOTION TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL DOMINIC BARBARA : Docket Numbers Defendant. : 2012NA NA NA NA X I, THERESA TEBBETT, being an attorney at law admitted to practice in the Courts of this State and an Assistant District Attorney of the County of Nassau, of Counsel to KATHLEEN M. RICE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY of the County of Nassau, attorney of record for the People of the State of New York, do hereby affirm the statements herein to be true under the penalties of perjury, except such as are made upon information and belief, which matters I believe to be true. The sources of such information and belief are: your affirmant s review of the files of the District Attorney in connection with these cases; review of the accusatory instruments and supporting depositions filed in connection with these cases; review of the police paperwork relevant to these cases; conversations I have had with the complaining witness in this case, Leslie Barbara; conversations I have had with the witness in this case, Frank Perrone; the sworn affidavit of Leslie Barbara which is annexed hereto, supporting documentation as referenced in Ms. Barbara s affidavit and annexed thereto, and my review of same; and conversations I have had with Assistant District Attorney Kyle Rose-Louder, Bureau Chief of the Special Victims Bureau of the Nassau County District Attorney s Office. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On September 5, 2012, the defendant, Dominic Barbara, was arrested and charged with one count of Criminal Contempt in the Second Degree in violation of P.L (3), for allegedly violating an order of protection the previous day. The defendant was before the court on
3 September 6, 2012 for arraignment on Docket 2012NA and the matter was adjourned to the DVM part for October 3, Upon information and belief, in the beginning of September 2012, attorney Bruce Barket contacted ADA Kyle Rose-Louder, Bureau Chief of the District Attorney s Office Special Victims Bureau, on behalf of the complaining witness in this case, Leslie Barbara. Sometime around the week of September 4 th 11 th, 2012, ADA Rose-Louder had a telephone conversation with Mr. Barket on behalf of Ms. Barbara, about what action if any would be taken by the District Attorney s office in response to allegations Ms. Barbara was raising against the defendant. 3. On October 3, 2012, the defendant appeared in the DVM part without an attorney, announced ready for trial, waived all discovery, and the case was adjourned at the People s request for October 29, On October 29, 1012, the case was administratively adjourned to October 31, 2012, due to Hurricane Sandy. 5. On October 31, 2012, the defendant did not appear nor did any counsel appear on his behalf, and the case was adjourned for conference to November 19, On November 19, 2012, neither the defendant nor any counsel appeared, and the case was again adjourned, with the court to notify the defendant, to December 12, On December 4, 2012, the defendant was arrested and charged with two counts of Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree in violation of P.L (1), one count of Stalking in the Fourth Degree in violation of P.L (2), one count of Stalking in the Fourth Degree in violation of P.L (3), and one count of Attempted Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree, in violation of P.L. 110/155.30(6). The nature of the allegations that comprise these charges are
4 detailed in the accusatory instruments and supporting depositions filed in connection with these charges, that are annexed to the instant motion as Exhibit 1. The defendant was brought before the court for arraignment on these charges under Docket numbers 2012NA027200, 2012NA and 2012NA on December 4, 2012, and the matters were adjourned to the DVM part on December On December 12, 2012, the defendant did not appear in part DVM, nor did any counsel appear on his behalf. A bench warrant was ordered by the Hon. Ferrell. 9. Upon information and belief, said bench warrant was executed on December 14, 2012 by Deputy Sheriffs from the Nassau County Sheriff s Department and the defendant was arrested in the Family Court building at 1200 Old Country Road, Westbury. 10. The defendant was brought before the District Court on December 15, 2012, the warrant was vacated, and the matter was adjourned back to the DVM part for December 18, On December 18, 2012, the defendant appeared in the DVM part without counsel, and the matter was adjourned to January 17, 2013 at the defendant s request. 12. On January 17, 2013, the defendant appeared in the DVM part again without counsel and requested an additional 2 weeks to retain an attorney. The cases were adjourned to January 31, 2013 at the defendant s request. 13. On January 31, 2013, the defendant appeared in the DVM part again without counsel and requested additional time to retain an attorney. The cases were adjourned to February 27, 2013 for that purpose at the defendant s request. 14. On February 27, 2013, the defendant appeared in the DVM part again without counsel and requested additional time to retain an attorney. The cases were adjourned to March 6, 2013 for that purpose at the defendant s request.
5 15. Upon information and belief, on March 5, 2013, Ms. Barbara received a telephone call from Mr. Barket wherein he indicated that the defendant had requested that Mr. Barket represent him at his next court appearance scheduled for the following day. Ms. Barbara advised Mr. Barkett during that conversation that she would not consent to him appearing on behalf of the defendant. 16. That same day, Ms. Barbara sent Mr. Barket a letter objecting in writing to representation of the defendant by him or anyone associated with his firm. A copy of said letter is attached to the instant motion as Exhibit Mr. Barket responded to Ms. Barbara in writing. A copy of said letter is attached to the instant motion as Exhibit On March 6, 2103, attorney Aida Ferrer Leisenring from the firm of Barket, Marion, Epstein and & Kearon, LLP, appeared on the defendant s behalf in the DVM part. 19. This case was conferenced with the Hon. Helen Voutsinas and the issue of a conflict of interest with this representation was raised, both at a bench conference and on the record. As a result of the People raising this issue at that time, a motion schedule was set by the Court and the People now file the instant motion. DISQUALIFICATION IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO THE NEW YORK RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT Pursuant to the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically Rule 1.7: Conflict of Interest: Current Clients; Rule 1.8: Current Clients: Specific Conflict of Interest Rules; Rule 1.9: Duties to Former Clients; Rule 1.10: Imputation of Conflicts of Interest; and Rule 1.12: Specific Conflicts of Interest for Former Judges, Arbitrators, Mediators or Other Third-Party Neutrals (attached as Exhibit 4), the People assert that the law firm of Barket, Marion, Epstein & Kearon, LLP must be disqualified from representing defendant Dominic Barbara in the cases
6 currently before this court. Because the complaining witness in this case, Leslie Barbara, had an attorney-client relationship with Bruce Barket prior to an associate from his firm appearing before this Court on the defendant s behalf, a conflict of interest exists and the firm s continued representation of the defendant implicates an ethical violation of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct. AN ATTORNEY CLIENT RELATIONSHIP EXISTED BETWEEN THE COMPLAINING WITNESS AND A NAMED PARTNER IN THE FIRM THAT NOW SEEKS TO REPRESENT THE DEFENDANT The People assert that an attorney-client relationship was formed between the complaining witness in this case and attorney Bruce Barket, a named partner of the firm Barket, Marion, Epstein & Kearon, LLP, that now seeks to represent the defendant by way of an associate in the firm, attorney Aida Ferrer Leisenring. This relationship was initiated by Ms. Barbara when she reached out to Mr. Barket for assistance and advice concerning the actions of her ex-husband, the defendant Dominic Barbara, as evidenced by the attached affidavit of Leslie Barbara (Exhibit 5, and its supporting documentation Exhibits A through E). An attorneyclient relationship arises only when one contacts an attorney in his capacity as such for the purpose of obtaining legal advice or services. Matter of Priest v. Hennessy, 51 N.Y.2d 62, (1980). The attorney-client relationship between Ms. Barbara and Mr. Barket arose when she first contacted him in July 2012, seeking advice. Formality is not essential to create a legal services contract. Therefore, it is necessary to look to the words and actions of the parties to ascertain if an attorney-client relationship was formed. Talansky v. Schulman, 2 A.D.3d 355, 358 (1st Dept. 2003) (citation omitted); see also Wei Cheng Chang v. Pi, 288 A.D.2d 378 (2d Dept. 2001), lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 501 (2002); McLenithan v. McLenithan, 273 A.D.2d 757 (3d Dept. 2000). Even if counsel did not execute a formal retainer agreement with the complainant, that does not foreclose the possibility that counsel and the complaining witness entered into a de facto attorney-client relationship. See People v. Fairman, 35 Misc.3d 1243(A) (Sup Ct Bronx Co 2012), citing Matter of Priest v. Hennessey, 51 N.Y. 2d at Whether or not the complaining witness paid Mr. Barket a retainer fee is also not controlling here. It should be
7 noted however that the complainant offered to pay Mr. Barket for his legal services and he declined, as indicated in her affidavit. The existence of a relationship is not dependent on the payment of a fee or an explicit agreement. See Pellegrino v. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., 49 A.D.3d 94, 99 (1 st Dept. 2008). An attorney-client relationship can even encompass a preliminary consultation where the prospective client does not ultimately retain the attorney. See id. This Court must examine the actions of both Ms. Barbara as client and Mr. Barket as attorney to determine if such a relationship existed. Ms. Barbara and Mr. Barket communicated with each other concerning the actions of the defendant and what Ms. Barbara s legal options were in response to those actions, as evidenced by her affidavit and its supporting documents. She sought his advice and his assistance in effecting the arrest of the defendant, and she sought his advocacy on her behalf to the District Attorney s Office to bring additional charges against the defendant. She provided him with documentation of the defendant s actions and other written communications that now form the basis of the charges pending before the Court against the defendant. In addition, Mr. Barket held himself out as her attorney through his actions in calling the District Attorney s Office and speaking with the Bureau Chief of the Special Victims Bureau on Ms. Barbara s behalf. As stated in the People s affirmation as well as Ms. Barbara s affidavit (Exhibit 5) and her supporting documentation (Exhibit B), Mr. Barket spoke with ADA Rose-Louder in early September 2012, he held himself out as an attorney acting on her behalf when he called to inquire about what if any additional charges would be brought against the defendant. All of these facts establish the clear existence of an attorney-client relationship between Ms. Barbara and Mr. Barket at the inception of the current criminal proceedings against the defendant. Therefore the first prong of seeking disqualification of counsel, namely, establishing the existence of an attorney client relationship, has been met here. THE ATTORNEY CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS ARE BOTH MATERIALLY ADVERSE AND SUBSTANTIALLY RELATED Clearly the attorney-client relationships are adverse to each other. The interests of Ms. Barbara as the complaining witness, and the defendant, both clients of Mr. Barket and his firm,
8 are materially adverse to each other in the context of a criminal prosecution. Neither party s interests can effectively be represented when they are opposed to each other. Ms. Barbara seeks prosecution of the defendant in these cases, and Mr. Barket and his firm now seek to defend the defendant in that same matter. Obviously these matters are substantially related as well, because they are the very same matters. Ms. Barbara sought Mr. Barket s legal assistance on the very matters that are now the subject of the charges against this defendant before this Court, on which Mr. Barket and his firm are seeking to represent the defendant. Acting on Ms. Barbara s behalf, Mr. Barket advocated to both the police and the District Attorney s Office for those entities to take action against the defendant in response to the criminal acts he was committing against Ms. Barbara. A conflict of interest exists when a defendant s attorney represents a prosecution witness. See People v. Green, 74 A.D.3d 1899, 1900 (4th Dept. 2010). The Court of Appeals held that perhaps the most pervasive source of conflict remains the victim. People v. McDonald, 68 N.Y.2d 1, 11 (1986) An attorney s decision whether and how best to impeach the credibility of a witness to whom he or his law partner - owes a duty of loyalty necessarily places the attorney in a very awkward position, where prejudice to defendant need not be precisely delineated but must be presumed. Id., citing People v. Mattison, 67 N.Y.2d 462, 470 (1986); see also People v. Carncross, 14 N.Y.3d 319, 328 (2010). Reversal is required where defense counsel represents both the defendant and the primary prosecution witness. See People v. Harris, 99 N.Y.2d 202, 210 (2002). Defense counsel s concurrent representation of an important prosecution witness on an unrelated civil matter gave rise to a conflict that warranted reversal. See People v. Wandell, 75 N.Y.2d 951, 952 (1990). In People v. Gordon, 272 A.D.2d 133, 134 (1st Dept. 2000), the court properly exercised its discretion in disqualifying defense counsel before trial where the attorney had previously represented a witness who testified against the defendant at trial, and whom the attorney has accompanied at an interview with the prosecutor. See id. The court found that continued representation of defendant by this attorney would create an actual conflict of interest. Id. When continued representation by an attorney would work unfair prejudice to either the prosecution or the defense, counsel should be disqualified. See People v. Twedt, 7 Misc.3d 665 (Sup Ct Bronx Co 2005).
9 The present case represents a unique set of facts which places an attorney who initially acted as counsel to, and an advocate for, a domestic violence victim, in the untenable position of now defending the perpetrator against the very allegations for which the attorney sought to have the defendant arrested and prosecuted for on the victim s behalf. Domestic Violence prosecutions, in particular, can cause problems which may result in a conflict of interest, and disqualification of counsel. This can occur when a defense attorney engages in lengthy, factbased conversations with the complaining witnesses, and then advocates on behalf of that witness as well as the defendant. People v. Fairman, 35 Misc.3d 1243(A) (Sup Ct Bronx Co 2012). The Court of Appeals has long held that a lawyer who represents two clients with conflicting interests by definition cannot give either client undivided loyalty. See People v. Longtin, 92 N.Y.2d 640, 644 (1998), citing People v. McDonald, 68 N.Y.2d 1 (1986); People v. Mattison, 67 N.Y.2d 462 (1986), cert denied 47 U.S. 984 (1986). Nor are conflict situations limited to simultaneous representations. Potential conflicts may exist between former clients and current clients because an attorney has continuing professional responsibilities to former clients, which include a duty to maintain that client s confidences and secrets even after the representation has ceased. See Longtin at 644, citing People v. Ortiz, 76 N.Y. 2d 652, 656 (1990); People v. Alicea, 61 N.Y.2d 23, 29 (1983); People v. Krausz, 84 N.Y.2d 953 (1994). As evidenced by Ms. Barbara s affidavit, she confided in Mr. Barkett with the understanding that he was representing her, and with the expectation that he would keep her confidence. Courts have held hat conflicts of interest may arise in either the simultaneous representation of clients with adverse interests or in successive representations because of an attorney s duty to maintain the former client s confidences even after the representation has ceased. People v. DiPippo, 82 A.D.3d 786, 789 (2d Dept. 2011), citing People v. Berroa, 99 N.Y.2d 134, 139 (2002) and People v. Ennis, 11 N.Y.3d 403, 410 (2008). A defense attorney s previous representation of a client whose interests conflicted with those of a defendant involves a potential conflict of interest. Ennis at 410. A conflict of interest exists when an attorney s current representation is impaired by the loyalty he owes a former client. United States v. Moscony, 927 F.2d 742, (3rd Cir 1991), People v. Martynov, 36 Misc.3d 1213(A) (Sup Ct Kings Co 2012).
10 Once it is established that a prior attorney-client relationship existed and that the former and current representations are both materially adverse and substantially related, the presumption of disqualification is irrebuttable. See Mancheski v. Gabelli Group Capital Partners, Inc., 22 A.D.3d 532, 534 (2d Dept. 2005); Tekni-plex v. Meyner & Landis, 89 N.Y.2d 123, 131 (1996). Underlying this rule is the notion that an attorney, as part of his fiduciary obligation, owes a continuing duty to a former client broader in scope that the attorney-client evidentiary privilege not to reveal confidences learned in the course of a professional relationship. Id. The irrebuttable presumption is imposed in order to safeguard client confidences and to free the former client from any apprehension that they will be used to the client's detriment in another matter. Pellegrino v. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., 49 A.D.3d 94, 98, (1st Dept. 2008), citing Solow v. Grace & Co., 83 N.Y.2d 303 (1994). The presumption is also intended to avoid an appearance of impropriety on the part of the attorney or the law firm. Solow v. Grace & Co., at 308. MS. BARBARA DOES NOT CONSENT TO THE REPRESENTATION Without the informed consent of Ms. Barbara, confirmed in writing, it is a clear violation of Rule1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10 and 1.12 for Mr. Barket and his firm to represent the defendant in the instant action. Ms. Barbara has refused to give such consent. She communicated such refusal to Mr. Barket in writing on March 5, 2013, after being informed by him that it was his intention to represent the defendant on these cases and send an associate from his firm to handle the defendant s appearance before this court on March 6, See attached Exhibit 2. Ms. Barbara s letter to Mr. Barket specifically stated I do not waive the conflict Mr. Barket responded in writing, acknowledged receiving her letter and simply stated I do not agree. See attached Exhibit 3. However, it is the client s wishes that control this situation. Absent her consent, Mr. Barket and his firm cannot represent the defendant in these matters. Pursuant to Rule 1.10, Imputation of Conflicts of Interest, no lawyer associated with the conflicted lawyer may accept the engagement. Rule 1.10(a) states: While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rule 1.7, 1.8 or 1.9, except as otherwise provided therein. Only where a law firm can successfully rebut the presumption of disqualification because any
11 information acquired by the disqualified lawyer is unlikely to be significant or material to the litigation, does the issue of screening measures come into consideration, where the firm must then erect adequate screening measures to separate the disqualified lawyer and eliminate any involvement by that lawyer in the representation. See Rodeo Family Enterprises, LLC. V. Matte et al, 31 Misc3d 1227(A), citing Kassis v. Teacher s Ins. And Ann. Assoc., 93 N.Y.2d 611, 617 (1999) No screening measures could ever be adequate in a case such as this, where the information acquired by the disqualified lawyer, namely Mr. Barket, is wholly significant and material to the litigation involved here, because it is the very subject of the charges pending against the defendant. The People further assert that Rule 1.12 may be implicated if Mr. Barkett and/or his firm are permitted to represent the defendant in the matter currently before the Court. The Hon. Elaine Jackson Stack, recently retired from the Family Court, is now of counsel to the firm of Barket, Marion, Epstein & Kearon, LLP, as reflected in their letterhead on Exhibit 3. Judge Stack was the judge who formerly presided over the family offense petition that the complaining witness filed in Family Court in 2012, seeking an Order of Protection, as indicated by Ms. Barbara s attached affidavit. The allegations contained in the Family Court petition are the same allegations that form the basis of the charges now pending before this Court. Throughout the latter part of 2012, upon information and belief, the complainant and the defendant had scheduled court appearances in front of Judge Stack. As indicated by Ms. Barbara s affidavit, their last scheduled court appearance in front of Judge Stack was on December 14, 2012, the same day as the defendant s arrest on the bench warrant issued in connection with these cases, and in fact, the defendant was arrested in the Family Court building. Because the merits of this case are involve the same allegations that comprised the family offenses that were before Judge Stack in Family Court, pursuant to Rule 1.12(a) and (d), this firm must be disqualified from representing the defendant in the instant cases. DEFENDANT S RIGHT TO COUNSEL OF HIS CHOOSING IS NOT ABSOLUTE Although [a] party's entitlement to be represented in ongoing litigation by counsel of his or her own choosing is a valued right which should not be abridged, such right will not
12 supersede a clear showing that disqualification is warranted. In Re Marvin Q, 45 A.D.3d 852 (2d Dept. 2007), see also, Carter v. Diaz, 27 Misc.3d 1231(A) (Sup Ct N.Y. Co. 2010). The Court of Appeals held in People v. Carnicross, 14 N.Y.3d 319 (2010), that in protecting a defendant s Sixth Amendment rights, a trial court may, on occasion properly disqualify an attorney of a defendant s choosing due to that attorney s conflicts, actual or potential, even in the face of defendant s waiver of such conflicts. See also People v. Gordon, 272 A.D.2d 133 (2000). Courts always have the responsibility of ensuring that cases before it are conducted within the ethical standards of the profession and that legal proceedings appear fair to all who observe them. See Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153, 160 (1988). In conclusion, and for all the reasons outlined above, as supported by the annexed Exhibits, the People respectfully request that this motion be granted in its entirety.
13 WHEREFORE, the People respectfully request that the Court grant the People s motion to disqualify counsel for the defendant. Dated: Hempstead, New York Respectfully Submitted, March 15, 2013 KATHLEEN M. RICE DISTRICT ATTORNEY NASSAU COUNTY BY: THERESA TEBBETT Assistant District Attorney 99 Main Street Hempstead, NY (516) To: Clerk of the Court Hon. Helen Voutsinas District Court Judge First District Court, Part DVM 99 Main Street Hempstead, New York Attorney for the Defendant Bruce Barket, Esq. Aida Ferrer Leisenring, Esq. Barket, Marion, Epstein & Kearon, LLP 666 Old Country Road, Suite 700 Garden City, New York 11530
ETHICS -- IT'S LEGAL, BUT IS IT RIGHT? A. Applying the State Bar Code of Ethics to Your Case The Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility (the
ETHICS -- IT'S LEGAL, BUT IS IT RIGHT? A. Applying the State Bar Code of Ethics to Your Case The Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility (the "Code of Professional Responsibility") applies to lawyers
More informationPeople v Alleyne 2014 NY Slip Op 33271(U) December 8, 2014 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 4856/2007 Judge: Bruce M. Balter Cases posted
People v Alleyne 2014 NY Slip Op 33271(U) December 8, 2014 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 4856/2007 Judge: Bruce M. Balter Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),
More informationIMPUTATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
CLIENT-LAWYER RELATIONSHIP: IMPUTATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST MRPC 1.10 1 RULE 1.10 IMPUTATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST: GENERAL RULE (a) While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly
More informationSUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA. Atlanta June 11, The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed:
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA Atlanta June 11, 2015 The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed: It is ordered that new Uniform Magistrate Court Rule 7.5 (relating
More informationGreenzweig v Kenmare Mott Realty Assoc. Inc NY Slip Op 32735(U) October 23, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Melvin
Greenzweig v Kenmare Mott Realty Assoc. Inc. 2013 NY Slip Op 32735(U) October 23, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 152160/12 Judge: Melvin L. Schweitzer Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,
More informationSimpson v Alter 2011 NY Slip Op 31765(U) June 21, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 11095/09 Judge: Thomas P. Phelan Republished from
Simpson v Alter 2011 NY Slip Op 31765(U) June 21, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 11095/09 Judge: Thomas P. Phelan Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service.
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Professional Responsibility And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question In 1995, Lawyer
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU -PART 47
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU -PART 47 INTEGRATED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT COMBINED PART RULES & PROCEDURES Acting Supreme Court Justice: HON. HELENE F.
More informationMatter of Demetriou (Aliano) 2016 NY Slip Op 32031(U) June 29, 2016 Surrogate's Court, Nassau County Docket Number: C Judge: Margaret C.
Matter of Demetriou (Aliano) 2016 NY Slip Op 32031(U) June 29, 2016 Surrogate's Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 359448C Judge: Margaret C. Reilly Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/12/ :47 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 110 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X Index No.: 805071/2016 JEANNETTE SWEAT, -against- Plaintiff, NOTICE OF MOTION ELIAS KASSPIDIS, M.D. and LENOX HILL HOSPITAL, Defendants. -------------------------------------
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CENTRAL DIVISION CASE NO. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
RICHARD L. DUQUETTE Attorney at Law P.O. Box 2446 Carlsbad, CA 92018 2446 SBN 108342 Telephone: (760 730 0500 Attorney for Petitioner CHRISTINA HARRIS SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF
More informationTEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST REPEAT VIOLENCE
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE IN AND FOR, Petitioner, JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No.: Division: and, Respondent. TEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST REPEAT VIOLENCE The Petition for Injunction
More informationNew York Law Journal
New York Law Journal December 2, 2004, Thursday Decision of Interest; New York Supreme Court, Bronx County; Criminal Prosecution for Harassment Not Barred By Family Court Imprisonment for Contempt BODY:
More information2014 PA Super 24. : : : : : : Appellees : No. 104 EDA 2013
2014 PA Super 24 JOHN J. DOUGHERTY, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellant v. PHILADELPHIA NEWSPAPERS, LLC, HAROLD JACKSON, PAUL DAVIS, DAVID BOYER, RUSSELL COOKE, MELANIE BURNEY, TONY AUTH AND
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS RULE 1 ADOPTION, CITATION, PURPOSE AND SUSPENSION OF LOCAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE AS ADOPTED JANUARY 30, 2009
LOCAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT TENNESSEE (COCKE, GRAINGER, JEFFERSON, SEVIER COUNTIES, PARTS I IV) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE: RULE 1 ADOPTION,
More informationBAR OF GUAM ETHICS COMMITTEE RULES OF PROCEDURE - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
BAR OF GUAM ETHICS COMMITTEE RULES OF PROCEDURE - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS 1 BAR OF GUAM ETHICS COMMITTEE RULES OF PROCEDURE - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS Rule 1. Purpose of Rules. The purpose of these rules
More informationNEW YORK STATE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT POLICY MANUAL
NEW YORK STATE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT POLICY MANUAL DECEMBER 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY NOTE 1 SECTION 1: STAFF 1.1 Administrator s Authority; Clerk of the Commission 2 1.2 Court of Appeals
More informationSupreme Court of the State of New York County of Nassau IAS Trial Part 22 Part Rules Updated: January 25, 2018
Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Nassau IAS Trial Part 22 Part Rules Updated: January 25, 2018 Justice: Law Secretary: Secretary: Part Clerk: Hon. Sharon M.J. Gianelli, J.S.C. Karen L.
More informationThe gist of MRPC 1.9 is that, even after
Focus on Professional Responsibility Conflicts of Interest The Basics By John W. Allen John W. Allen, chairperson of the State Bar of Michigan s Standing Committee on Professional and Judicial Ethics,
More informationCase KJC Doc 108 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Chapter 11
Case 16-11247-KJC Doc 108 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: INTERVENTION ENERGY HOLDINGS, LLC., et al., Chapter 11 Case No. 16-11247(KJC) Debtors.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL
2 Civil 2 Civil B194120 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT (DIVISION 4) 4) HUB HUB CITY SOLID WASTE SERVICES,
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/ :47 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------X FEROZ ALAM, Plaintiff, NOTICE OF MOTION Index No.: 451193/2015 -against-
More informationPLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that upon the annexed affirmation of JEENA R. BELIL, dated XXXXXXX 4,
SURPEME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------X XXXXXXXXXXX AND XXXXXXXXXXX, -against- Plaintiffs XXXXXX and XXXXXXX,
More informationTEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COUNTY, FLORIDA, Petitioner, Case No.: Division: and, Respondent. TEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING The Petition for Injunction
More informationNASSAU COUNTY YOUTH PART District Court Room 268
NASSAU COUNTY YOUTH PART District Court Room 268 PART RULES & PROCEDURES Acting Supreme Court Justice: Principle Law Clerk: Secretary: HON. NORMAN ST. GEORGE WILLIAM BODKIN, ESQ. MARIANNE ADRIAN Phone:
More informationBorden v 400 E. 55th St. Assoc. L.P NY Slip Op 33712(U) April 11, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Judith J.
Borden v 400 E. 55th St. Assoc. L.P. 2012 NY Slip Op 33712(U) April 11, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 650361/09 Judge: Judith J. Gische Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,
More informationCOURT RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 12 TABLE OF CONTENTS
COURT RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 12 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1. Title... 2 Section 2. Purpose... 2 Section 3. Definitions... 2 Section 4. Fundamental Rights of Defendants... 4 Section 5. Arraignment...
More informationDeerin v Ocean Rich Foods, LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 32747(U) August 6, 2015 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: Judge: Timothy S.
Deerin v Ocean Rich Foods, LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 32747(U) August 6, 2015 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 600536-2014 Judge: Timothy S. Driscoll Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013
More informationStreamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures
RESOLUTIONS, LLC s GUIDE TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures 1. Scope of Rules The RESOLUTIONS, LLC Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures ("Rules") govern binding
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/13/ :15 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/13/2015. Exhibit 1.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/13/2015 05:15 PM INDEX NO. 652471/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/13/2015 Exhibit 1 Document1 SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK SNI/SI
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/ :47 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 40 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF BRONX ---------------------------------------------------------------------X FEROZ ALAM, Plaintiff, AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT Index No.: 451193/2015 -against-
More informationJoseph Gunnar & Co., LLC v Rice 2015 NY Slip Op 30233(U) February 13, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2014 Judge: Eileen A.
Joseph Gunnar & Co., LLC v Rice 215 NY Slip Op 3233(U) February 13, 215 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 651259/214 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "3" identifier, i.e., 213 NY
More informationPeople v Bennett 2015 NY Slip Op 30933(U) May 7, 2015 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 480/1985 Judge: Miriam Cyrulnik Cases posted with a
People v Bennett 2015 NY Slip Op 30933(U) May 7, 2015 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 480/1985 Judge: Miriam Cyrulnik Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),
More informationSignature Bank v Atlas Race LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 32366(U) November 28, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Kathryn E.
Signature Bank v Atlas Race LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 32366(U) November 28, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 162985/15 Judge: Kathryn E. Freed Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cr-000-gmn-pal Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. CLIVEN D. BUNDY, Defendants. Case No.: :-cr-0-gmn-pal ORDER Pending
More informationFILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/07/ :36 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/07/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS -----------------------------------------------------------------------------X OKSANA O. TUMAN, -against- Plaintiff, SUNSET BOYZ CORPORATION and MERCEDES
More informationSTATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT OUTAGAMIE COUNTY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR STAY OF DISCOVERY
Case 2012CV001704 Document 367 Filed 03-27-2019 Page 1 of 6 FILED 03-27-2019 Clerk of Circuit Court Outagamie County 2012CV001704 STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT OUTAGAMIE COUNTY WML GRYPHON FUND, LLC,
More informationNASSAU COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS. Opinion No.: (Inquiry No.): 698
NASSAU COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS Opinion No.: 2003-1 (Inquiry No.): 698 Topics: Digest: Code Provisions: Facts Presented: Preservation of Confidences and Secrets; Effect of
More informationUpon reading and filing the annexed affidavit of plaintiff,
PRESENT: At IAS Part 7 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of Bronx, at the courthouse located at 851 Grand Concourse, Bronx, New York, this dayof, 2017. HON. WILMA
More informationIndo-Med Commodities, Inc. v Wisell 2014 NY Slip Op 33918(U) September 29, 2014 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: /14 Judge: F.
Indo-Med Commodities, Inc. v Wisell 2014 NY Slip Op 33918(U) September 29, 2014 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 600546/14 Judge: F. Dana Winslow Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,
More informationKin Lung Cheung v Nicosia 2014 NY Slip Op 32176(U) July 30, 2014 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Mark I. Partnow Cases posted
Kin Lung Cheung v Nicosia 2014 NY Slip Op 32176(U) July 30, 2014 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: 501965/13 Judge: Mark I. Partnow Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),
More informationCase 1:08-cv JHR-AMD Document 36 Filed 04/07/2009 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 108-cv-04614-JHR-AMD Document 36 Filed 04/07/2009 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY MASHA ALLEN, by her Parent and Guardian FAITH ALLEN, Plaintiff, vs. DOCKET NO. 108-CV-04614-JHR-AMD
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
Filing # 45970766 E-Filed 09/01/2016 12:25:05 PM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA THE FLORIDA BAR, Supreme Court Case No. SC16-1323 v. Complainant, The Florida Bar File No. 2014-70,056 (11G) JOSE MARIA
More informationIN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION., ) Plaintiff, ) ) CONSENT STIPULATIONS FOR v. ) ARBITRATION PROCEDURES ), ) Defendant.
NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION -CVD-, ) Plaintiff, ) ) CONSENT STIPULATIONS FOR v. ) ARBITRATION PROCEDURES ), ) Defendant. ) THIS CAUSE came on to be heard
More informationPaladino v Skate Safe, Inc NY Slip Op 32090(U) July 29, 2010 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 3252/08 Judge: Daniel Palmieri
Paladino v Skate Safe, Inc. 2010 NY Slip Op 32090(U) July 29, 2010 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 3252/08 Judge: Daniel Palmieri Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts
More informationPA Huntingdon Cty. Civ. LR 205 This document is current with amendments received through June 1, 2016
PA Huntingdon Cty. Civ. LR 205 Pennsylvania Local Rules of Court > HUNTINGDON COUNTY > RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Rule 205. Civil Case Management 1. The Huntingdon County Civil Case Management Plan. (a)
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/20/ :43 AM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/20/2017 EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT A 00929366.1 â Page 1 1 DISTRICT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU FIRST DISTRICT : CRIMINAL PART 1 2 ------------------------------------------X 3 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 4 -against- Index
More informationRULE 1.7 CONFLICT OF INTEREST: GENERAL RULE
Disqualification of Counsel in Litigation Jonathan E. Hawkins Krevolin Horst, LLC One Atlantic Center 1201 West Peachtree Street, NW Suite 3250 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 I. Rules of Professional Conduct Addressing
More informationEthics for Municipal Attorneys
LEAGUE OF WISCONSIN MUNICIPALITIES 2018 MUNICIPAL ATTORNEYS INSTITUTE June 20, 2018 Ethics for Municipal Attorneys Presented by: Dean R. Dietrich, Esq. Ruder Ware L.L.S.C. P.O. Box 8050 Wausau, WI 54402-8050
More informationAPPELLATE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
E-Filed Document Sep 23 2015 13:42:39 2015-CA-00502-COA Pages: 18 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI Trial Court Nos. 2006-109; 2006-157 / No. 2015-CA-00502-C0A NEDRA PITTMAN, Petitioner
More informationCALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT Title 3. Civil Rules Division 8. Alternative Dispute Resolution Chapter 1. General Provisions
Page 1 Chapter 1. General Provisions Cal Rules of Court, Rule 3.800 (2009) Rule 3.800. Definitions As used in this division: (1) "Alternative dispute resolution process" or "ADR process" means a process,
More informationSUPREME COURT - NASSAU COUNTY - IAS PART 56 PART RULES & PROCEDURES
SUPREME COURT - NASSAU COUNTY - IAS PART 56 PART RULES & PROCEDURES Justice: HON. THOMAS RADEMAKER Secretary: MARILYN McINTOSH Part Clerk: TRINA PAYNE Phone: (516) 493-3420 Courtroom: (516) 493-3423 Fax:
More informationLi Ping Xie v Jang 2012 NY Slip Op 33871(U) February 28, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2008E Judge: Paul G.
Li Ping Xie v Jang 2012 NY Slip Op 33871(U) February 28, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 117222/2008E Judge: Paul G. Feinman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
More informationADR CODE OF PROCEDURE
Last Revised 12/1/2006 ADR CODE OF PROCEDURE Rules & Procedures for Arbitration RULE 1: SCOPE OF RULES A. The arbitration Rules and Procedures ( Rules ) govern binding arbitration of disputes or claims
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/27/ :37 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2015. Exhibit
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2015 03:37 PM INDEX NO. 653564/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2015 Exhibit FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/30/2015 04:32 PM INDEX NO. 653564/2014 NYSCEF
More informationCourtroom Terminology
Courtroom Terminology Accused: formally charged but not yet tried for committing a crime; the person who has been charged may also be called the defendant. Acquittal: a judgment of court, based on the
More informationAttachment 14 to Form AT-105
1 Attachment to Form AT- Requested temporary protective order: Defendants are prohibited from selling, transferring, hypothecating, assigning, re-financing, or making any other transaction affecting the
More informationAt IAS Part of the Supreme Court of. County of Kings at the courthouse located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York , on the day 2018.
At IAS Part of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of Kings at the courthouse located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York 10007, on the day 2018. of, PRESENT: HON.
More informationUSER'S NOTE. JOSEPH T. LEE Attorney at Law. New York Long Beach, NY New Jersey Tel Washington D.C.
USER'S NOTE NOTE THIS FILE CONTAINS A QUICK MEMORANDUM TO SUPPORT A DEFENDANT'S RELEASE PURSUANT TO CPL 170.70 DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE MISDEMEANOR ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT IS INSUFFICIENT. THIS FILE ALSO
More informationLLC, was removed to this Court from state court in December (Docket No. 1). At that
Leong v. The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Doc. 50 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X OEI HONG LEONG, Plaintiff,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. Plaintiff, Case No CI-11 MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JUDGE
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE OF THE BANC OF AMERICA FUNDING 2007-D, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 09-13768CI-11
More informationAttorneys handling criminal appeals will undoubtedly encounter trial. records reflecting unilateral decisions by defense counsel which prevented their
Counsel s Obligation to Advise a Defendant on the Right to Testify By: Mark M. Baker 1 Attorneys handling criminal appeals will undoubtedly encounter trial records reflecting unilateral decisions by defense
More informationCITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH Request for City Commission Agenda
Item: CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH Request for City Commission Agenda Agenda Date Requested: August 20, 2013 Contact Person: Andy Maurodis Description: Resolution creating new Quasi-Judicial procedures. Fiscal
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/08/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/08/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------------X EFCO PRODUCTS DEFINED CONTRIBUTION NON-UNION PLAN, EFCO PRODUCTS DEFINED
More informationSpallone v Spallone 2014 NY Slip Op 32412(U) September 11, 2014 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted
Spallone v Spallone 2014 NY Slip Op 32412(U) September 11, 2014 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: 160061/2013 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),
More informationPacket Two: Criminal Law and Procedure Chapter 1: Background
Packet Two: Criminal Law and Procedure Chapter 1: Background Review from Introduction to Law The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The United States Supreme Court is the final
More informationMARITIME ARBITRATION RULES SOCIETY OF MARITIME ARBITRATORS, INC.
MARITIME ARBITRATION RULES SOCIETY OF MARITIME ARBITRATORS, INC. These Rules apply to contracts entered into on or after March 14, 2018 P R E A M B L E INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF RULES The powers
More informationrdd Doc 267 Filed 08/16/13 Entered 08/16/13 14:47:55 Main Document Pg 1 of 3
13-22840-rdd Doc 267 Filed 08/16/13 Entered 08/16/13 14:47:55 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------X
More informationThe People of the State of New York. against. Joseph Bonelli, Defendant.
[*1] Decided on March 25, 2008 Supreme Court, Queens County The People of the State of New York against Joseph Bonelli, Defendant. 11117/2006 Counsels' appearances are: For the People:Peter A. Crusco Exec.
More informationKENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY PRACTICE OF LAW
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY PRACTICE OF LAW SCR 3.130(1.7) Conflict of interest: current clients (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent
More informationMatter of City Bros., Inc. v Business Integrity Commn NY Slip Op 33427(U) December 4, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:
Matter of City Bros., Inc. v Business Integrity Commn. 2013 NY Slip Op 33427(U) December 4, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 101324/13 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Cases posted with a "30000"
More informationBank of N.Y. Mellon v Dutan 2016 NY Slip Op 32101(U) September 20, 2016 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 33708/2009 Judge: Robert J.
Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Dutan 2016 NY Slip Op 32101(U) September 20, 2016 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 33708/2009 Judge: Robert J. McDonald Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013
More informationCase 1:10-cv FJS Document 24 Filed 11/18/11 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:10-cv-01962-FJS Document 24 Filed 11/18/11 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA EARLE A. PARTINGTON Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 10-1962-FJS v. VICE ADMIRAL JAMES W. HOUCK,
More informationBank of Am., N.A. v Sigo Mfr. L.L.C NY Slip Op 33538(U) January 12, 2011 Supreme Court, Albany County Docket Number: 7002/10 Judge: Joseph C.
Bank of Am., N.A. v Sigo Mfr. L.L.C. 2011 NY Slip Op 33538(U) January 12, 2011 Supreme Court, Albany County Docket Number: 7002/10 Judge: Joseph C. Teresi Republished from New York State Unified Court
More informationComponents of an Effective Ethical Screen
Components of an Effective Ethical Screen By Anthony Davis and Michael Downey 1 The lawyer ethics rules in the various states generally specify at least some circumstances when a law firm may erect an
More informationFINAL JUDGMENT OF INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING (AFTER NOTICE)
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COUNTY, FLORIDA, Petitioner, and Case No.: Division:, Respondent. FINAL JUDGMENT OF INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING (AFTER NOTICE) The
More information[QIJ$&J ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND
Case 1:14-cv-01343-RGA Document 57 Filed 12/22/15 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 873 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE VAMSI ANDAVARAPU, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated,
More informationIN THE TENNESSEE COURT OF THE JUDICIARY'~~~? 22 f,: 2: 57
731- r.- IN THE TENNESSEE COURT OF THE JUDICIARY'~~~? 22 f,: 2: 57 IN RE: -. I - '
More informationCase 2:14-cv SPL Document 25 Filed 09/11/14 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of William R. Mettler, Esq. S. Price Road Chandler, Arizona Arizona State Bar No. 00 (0 0-0 wrmettler@wrmettlerlaw.com Attorney for Defendant Zenith Financial
More informationCASE NO. CL JAMES DANIEL GRIFFITH VSB DOCKET NOS.:
12/27/2018 09:56 (FAX) P.002/003 VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF FAIRFAX IN THE MATTERS OF CASE NO. CL2018-15409 JAMES DANIEL GRIFFITH VSB DOCKET NOS.: 18-070-110110 18-070-110600
More informationAllaire v Mover 2014 NY Slip Op 32507(U) September 29, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Marcy S. Friedman Cases posted
Allaire v Mover 2014 NY Slip Op 32507(U) September 29, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 650177/09 Judge: Marcy S. Friedman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),
More informationAtria Retirement Props., L.P. v Bradford 2012 NY Slip Op 33460(U) August 22, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge:
Atria Retirement Props., L.P. v Bradford 2012 NY Slip Op 33460(U) August 22, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 651823/11 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,
More informationLocal Rules Governing Juvenile Delinquency and Undisciplined Proceedings In The 26 th Judicial District. November 2011
Local Rules Governing Juvenile Delinquency and Undisciplined Proceedings In The 26 th Judicial District November 2011 LOCAL RULES GOVERNING JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AND UNDISCIPLINED PROCEEDINGS IN THE 26
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
4:14-cv-11191-LVP-MKM Doc # 95 Filed 11/20/15 Pg 1 of 19 Pg ID 3450 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION NEW YORK STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 13-F-48 Thomas C. Evans, Ill, Judge PETER LIZON, Defendant. MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT Now comes
More informationCALIFORNIA YACHT BROKERS ASSOCIATION
CALIFORNIA YACHT BROKERS ASSOCIATION The California Yacht Brokers Association was established on January 29, 1975 as a non-profit, unincorporated association of yacht brokers, salespersons and others dedicated
More informationKaplan v Conway & Conway 2018 NY Slip Op 32178(U) September 4, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /17 Judge: Frank P.
Kaplan v Conway & Conway 2018 NY Slip Op 32178(U) September 4, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 158060/17 Judge: Frank P. Nervo Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/09/ :53 PM
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/09/2015 03:53 PM INDEX NO. 158764/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/09/2015 Exhibit B to the Affirmation of Howard I. Elman, Esq. in Support of Defendants Motion
More informationMinnesota No-Fault, Comprehensive or Collisions Damage Automobile Insurance Arbitration RULES
Minnesota No-Fault, Comprehensive or Collisions Damage Automobile Insurance Arbitration RULES Amended and Effective August 5, 2003 Rule 1. Purpose and Administration a. b. c. The purpose of the Minnesota
More informationEpstein Becker & Green, P.C. v Amersino Mktg. Group, Inc NY Slip Op 32882(U) November 30, 2012 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2010
Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. v Amersino Mktg. Group, Inc. 2012 NY Slip Op 32882(U) November 30, 2012 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: 102458/2010 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Republished from New York State
More informationMatter of Sullivan v Board of Appeals of the Town of Hempstead 2018 NY Slip Op 33441(U) December 10, 2018 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number:
Matter of Sullivan v Board of Appeals of the Town of Hempstead 2018 NY Slip Op 33441(U) December 10, 2018 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 609514/18 Judge: Denise L. Sher Cases posted with a
More informationState of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: June 28, 2018 D-78-18 In the Matter of MARY ELIZABETH RAIN, an Attorney. ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE
More informationEleventh Judicial District Local Rules
Eleventh Judicial District Local Rules Table of Contents Standardized Practice for District Court Criminal Sessions... 11.3 Order for Non-Appearing Defendants/ Respondents and Non-Complying Defendant/
More informationLOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES
DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES Rule Effective Chapter 1. Civil Cases over $25,000 300. Renumbered as Rule 359 07/01/09 301. Classification 07/01/09 302. Renumbered as Rule 361 07/01/09 303. All-Purpose Assignment
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/11/ :18 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/11/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------)( 332 EAST 66TH STREET, INC. and 167 BLEECKER HOLDING CORP. -against- Plaintiffs,
More informationWashoe Tribe of Nevada and California. Law & Order Code TRIBAL COURT RULES. [Last Amended: 9/11/2009; Current Through 2/25/2010] TABLE OF CONTENTS
Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California Law & Order Code TRIBAL COURT RULES [Last Amended: 9/11/2009; Current Through 2/25/2010] TABLE OF CONTENTS Rule 1 Applicability and Citation of the Rules... 1 Rule
More informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS DECISION
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. SUPERIOR COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND : : VS. : NO. P2/96-548 A : ARTHUR D AMARIO, III : DECISION CLIFTON, J. This matter is presently before
More informationCommissioner of the State Ins. Fund v DFL Carpentry, Inc NY Slip Op 31076(U) May 20, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:
Commissioner of the State Ins. Fund v DFL Carpentry, Inc. 2015 NY Slip Op 31076(U) May 20, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 452808/08 Judge: Anil C. Singh Cases posted with a "30000"
More informationCase KG Doc 3307 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 15-11874-KG Doc 3307 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: Chapter 11 HH Liquidation, LLC, et al., 1 Case No. 15-11874 (KG Debtors. (Jointly
More informationCase 1:15-cv WHP Document 148 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:15-cv-01249-WHP Document 148 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE VIRTUS INVESTMENT PARTNERS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No. 15-cv-1249
More information