http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/ Published by Silverberg Zalantis LLP en-us 2010-06-17T10:32:35-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2010/06/additional_insured_entitled_to_1.html Noting that it was “once again asked to determine the obligation of an insurer to defend and indemnify,” New York highest court ruled that an additional insured was entitled to defense and indemnification. In Regal Constr. Corp. v. National Union... Contract Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2010-06-17T10:32:35-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2010/04/district_court_may_make_a_dete_1.html In a matter of first impression, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that where a Court has before it the two works in question in a copyright infringement action, a Court could rule on the... Copyright Infringement Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2010-04-27T15:15:21-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2010/03/commercial_tenant_not_entitled_1.html New York’s highest court has ruled that the tax benefit program’s exemptions and abatements did not extend to the cooperative’s commercial tenant. In Barnan Assoc. v. 196 Owners Corp., the commercial-tenant Barnan Associates entered into a lease in 1979 with... Real Estate Litigation Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2010-03-25T12:56:28-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2010/01/law_firm_violated_fair_debt_ac_1.html The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that that a law-firm (and the individual attorneys) violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) by starting a lawsuit to collect a debt during the 30-day validation period... Debt Collection Practices Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2010-01-14T11:07:21-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2010/01/no_implied_contract_requiring_1.html The Appellate Division Second Department has ruled that there was not sufficient “assent” to require a law firm to pay a recruiting firm’s fee when the resume was sent to a partner in the firm’s New York office, but the candidate was independently interviewed and hired by the firm’s Washington D.C. office. Contract Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2010-01-04T10:36:47-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2009/12/payment_to_court_of_more_than.html Even though the defendant remitted to the Court (but not the plaintiff) more than the amount necessary to redeem the property before the foreclosure sale, the Court of Appeals ruled that the property owner did not properly stay the sale nor did it exercise its right to redeem. Foreclosure Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2009-12-21T17:03:00-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2009/12/defendant_in_foreclosure_actio.html The Appellate Division, Second Department ruled that even though the defendant waived their setoff rights in the mortgage, the Court ruled that defendant was entitled to a setoff as the possession agreement “executed on the same day, by the same parties, and for the same purpose” provided for a setoff. Foreclosure Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2009-12-18T16:59:23-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2009/12/procedural_error_in_disciplinary_hearing_process_entitles_employee_to_four_years_of_back_pay_and_benefits.html In what one of the concurring Justices termed “an excessive burden to impose on the County for a procedural error,” the Court of Appeals ruled that it was compelled, based upon its prior determinations, to rule that the petitioner was entitled to recover four years worth of back pay and that “the problem is one that only the Legislature can fix.” Employment Law Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2009-12-16T16:37:36-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2009/11/mortgage_commitment_does_not_b.html The Appellate Division, Second Department ruled that potential home purchasers could cancel their contract of sale without losing their down payment based upon a change in facts stated in a credit report. Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2009-11-25T10:15:00-05:00 http://www.newyorkbusinesslitigationlawyerblog.com/2009/11/a_restrictive_covenant_to_prev_1.html The Appellate Division, Second Department recently ruled that since a bakery had agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions of a non-competition restrictive covenant in its deed, and since such covenant was apparently still of actual and substantial... Silverberg Zalantis LLP 2009-11-24T12:58:11-05:00