top of page

Search Results

Search results for "americans with disabilities act"

1393 results found for "americans with disabilities act"

  • New York Court of Appeals Makes a Significant Ruling on RPAPL 1304

    previously noted in the Blog, RPAPL 1304 requires that at least ninety days before commencing legal action a list of approved housing agencies that offer free or low-cost counseling; and, advise that legal action may be commenced after ninety days if no action is taken to resolve the matter. Pending the Court of Appeals’ Decision in Bank of America, N.A. v. Lender had commenced a foreclosure action but sought a discretionary stay while awaiting the Court of

  • New York Class Actions – Pre-Certification Settlement Does Not Require Notice To The Putative Class

    And by the very act of asking for court approval, which would otherwise not be necessary, the parties In CalPERS , the Supreme Court held that the class action “tolling” principle set forth in American Pipe Utah , 414 U.S. 538 (1974), does not apply to the three-year statute of repose under the Securities Act Although the Supreme Court specifically addressed the statute of repose set forth in the Securities Act , the Court’s reasoning indicates that tolling under American Pipe does not apply to a statutory repose

  • When is an Essential Fact Not a Fact at All?

    , which named defendant a fiduciary of the estate and “authorize and empower ” her to “perform all acts

  • Follow-up: Freedom Mortgage Corp. v. Engel

    Borrower defaulted in March of 2008 and a foreclosure action was commenced in July of 2008.  Two years later, lender commenced a new action to foreclose the mortgage.  Borrower moved to dismiss the new action as time-barred because by the first action, the debt was accelerated Supreme court held that the stipulation was an affirmative act by which the lender revoked its election was an “affirmative act” sufficient to deaccelerate the loan. 

  • Fraudulent Inducement Is Not a Do-Over: Emails, Merger Clauses, and Justifiable Reliance

    be demonstrated that there was a false representation, made for the purpose of inducing another to act should [be] dismissed.” [10]   Moreover, the “[p]laintiff must show not only that he actually relied Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff’s causes of action for a declaratory judgment (second cause of action ) and fraudulent inducement (third cause of action). In a short decision, the Court held that “[p]laintiff failed to adequately plead a cause of action for

  • Forming a Shell Company to Avoid Paying Rent Sufficient to Pierce the Corporate Veil

    defendants for opening a judgment proof shell company to avoid paying rent. 134 Emmut Props . was an action Plaintiff alleged that Yuen’s sister, defendant Su Hua Situ (“Su”) negotiated the Lease and was actively Thereafter, plaintiff filed an action in Supreme Court, New York County. owner uses the corporation “to commit fraud , or violate other legal duty, or has been used to do an act Takeaway Business owners and entrepreneurs wishing to insulate themselves from personal liability for the acts

  • Fraud Notes: Accounting Fraud, Scienter, Justifiable Reliance and the Statute of Limitations – A Potpourri of Fraud Allegations

    motion court held that plaintiffs pleaded enough facts to raise a reasonable inference that CohnReznick acted argument that it owed no duty to plaintiffs: “‘There are allegations not only that defendant fail to act continuing wrongs,” the statute of limitations will be tolled to the last date on which a wrongful act separate and independent ( id. ), not “continuing consequential damages” that arise from a single tortious act withstand summary judgment by demonstrating that defendant committed independent and distinct fraudulent acts

  • A Primer on The Components of Personal Jurisdiction

    The court denied the motion, and dismissed the action for lack of personal jurisdiction, because plaintiff Appellate Division, Second Department, undermining the court’s reliance on that case in dismissing the action Plaintiff contends, in essence, that a dismissal due to short service would be unfair because plaintiff acted Under CPLR 3213, a plaintiff may seek summary judgment in lieu of a complaint “ hen action is based

  • Enforcement News: Relationship Investment Scams

    kinds of frauds can be devastating and cause investors to lose billions of dollars every year,” said Acting buying into a crypto asset investment like an  ‘Initial Coin Offering’ (“ICO”)  when the target is actually just because an app is available on a well-known app store doesn’t mean that the app itself, or the activities about relying on celebrity and influencer testimonials: Fraudsters sometimes pay others—for example, actors ), the CFTC described the scam as situations in which “fraudsters—including criminals and other bad actors—often

  • First Department Grants Extension of Time to Serve Summons and Complaint on a Mechanic’s Lien Discharge Bond Surety Under CPLR 306

    Under the present “commencement by filing” system, an action (or proceeding) (collectively, an “Action Once an Action is commenced, the plaintiff (or petitioner) (collectively, a “Plaintiff”) must effectuate upon a defendant within the time provided in this section, the court, upon motion, shall dismiss the action Plaintiffs were “considerabl benefit ” by “making the act of filing the point at which a claim is interposed Under the old statute, a Plaintiff was afforded 120 days to effectuate service of process and the Action

  • Settlement Term Sheet Constitutes Instrument for the Payment of Money Only

    Haber Pursuant to CPLR 3213, a plaintiff may commence an action “based upon an instrument for the payment motion: accelerated judgment will be awarded “if, upon all the papers and proof submitted, the cause of action Background Tangtiwatanapaibul was an action to enforce and recover upon a term sheet memorializing the 2020, Magistrate Judge Parker approved the settlement reflected in the Term Sheet and dismissed the action amount due.[11] These terms, said the motion court, were unconditional and not contingent upon any other act

  • Omission of Material Information Sufficient to Invalidate Class Action Stipulation of Settlement Involving the Merger of Saks Incorporated and Hudson’s Bay Company

    reversed the denial of a motion to invalidate a settlement agreement and allowed an amendment to a class action On October 22, 2013, the Shareholders and the Saks Parties executed a settlement stipulation in the action the parties agreed to mutual releases of any and all claims arising from the subject matter of the action claims, they do not pose an independent basis for denying the motion to amend, because, while class action relationship exists, the mere failure to disclose facts which one is required to disclose may constitute actual

bottom of page