When the Court orders you to attend a Continuing Legal Education (CLE) class on civility “for the harm [you’ve] done to the [legal] profession”– not to mention issues you five-figures in sanctions – you know you’ve done something very, very
A few years back, in a post entitled What the Commercial Division Has Done for Us Lately, we commented on a 2019 report from the Commercial Division Advisory Council, which extolled “The Benefits of the Commercial Division to the
Justice Cohen reminds counsel that the Commercial Division word limits exist to keep arguments concise, not test whether lawyers can “respectfully refer the Court to” or “incorporate herein” other filings into their memoranda.
Courts continue to refer to federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) claims as “potent weapons” that are equivalent to a “thermonuclear device” in cases involving criminal racketeering activity. So why are we seeing RICO claims in ordinary business
The Commercial Division in Bronx County hasn’t been around all that long, opening its doors for adjudication in September 2019 with its very first case, Manhattan Beer Distributers LLC v Biagio Cru and Estate Wines, LLC. Justice Eddie McShan
On March 7, 2022, Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence K. Marks signed administrative order amending the commercial division rules to modernize and streamline the rules concerning ESI.
As mortgage loan transactions continue to become increasingly complex, lenders often worry about the remedies they have if borrowers fail to live up to their obligations. In the event of a default, lenders have the choice under New York’s election
In Castle Restoration & Constr., Inc. v Castle Restoration, LLC, Suffolk County Commercial Division Justice Elizabeth H. Emerson refused to enforce an oral agreement that allegedly modified a prior written agreement between the parties. In this blog post, we
A recent decision from the First Department reminds us that New York courts are not sympathetic to duress claims when the alleged acts or threatened acts fall within the ambit of the defendant’s rights under a valid agreement.
In Zhang
