a difficult time proving that the defendant knowingly submitted a false claim in violation of that law

Section 320(a) of New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (the “CPLR”), which sets forth, inter alia, Town-Line Car Wash, Inc. v. The Court then discussed informal appearances; noting that “[w]hen a defendant participates in a lawsuit

related entities controlled by Larmore with violating the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws

that a fraud claim be pleaded with particularity can be found in Section 3016(b) of the Civil Practice Law Under New York law, an action based upon fraud must be commenced within six years of the date the cause

written mediation demand if the dispute remains unresolved after 14 days, and (3) the filing of any lawsuit Under New York law, conditions precedent must be expressed in clear, unmistakable language.

time, and “ha been applied narrowly, due in part to judicial recognition that the purpose of contract law performance” is “limited to destruction of the means of performance by an act of God, Vis major, or by law in part upon New York City Administrative Code § 22-1005 ("§ 22-1005"), also referred to as Local Law asserted that landlord’s motion should be denied for “impossibility of performance,” which is a common law doctrine recognized under New York law “to excuse performance when there have been extraordinary intervening

The law is clear that a “court lacks personal jurisdiction over a defendant who is not properly served

A Quick Primer CPLR 3213 is a provision in New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (“CPLR”) that allows a plaintiff to seek summary judgment in lieu of a complaint when the case is based on an instrument Section 11 of the Engagement Letter, which provided that Jefferies could obtain “summary judgment in lieu 1] This BLOG has written numerous articles addressing CPLR 3213 and motions for summary judgment in lieu articles, please see the BLOG tile on our website and search for “CPLR 3213”, “summary judgment in lieu

CPLR 2004 CPLR 2004 provides that “[e]xcept where otherwise expressly prescribed by law, the court may

Plaintiffs also alleged that in 2016 and 2017, Kenneth obtained a $2.5 million line of credit from Citibank had a duty to inform plaintiffs of the questionable payments.” 5 The Court agreed, noting that the “law s alleged improper transactions but that it participated in the alleged breaches. 7 Under New York law

Since our founding, we have provided the sophistication and counsel of a large national law firm with The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Freiberger Haber LLP, 425 Broadhollow Road, Suite

The law is clear that “an agent for a disclosed principal will not be personally bound unless there is plaintiff, stated: The plaintiff established, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law Similarly, “ t has long been an established rule of law that the agent is not liable to third parties for, inter alia , “race-based discrimination in violation of the New York City and State Human rights laws The Court, after setting forth the law on agency like that which is set forth herein, including that