Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Case Briefs
New York Supreme Court Bars Discovery of Extrinsic Evidence Without Allegation Of Contract Ambiguity
One of the issues driving the cost and length of insurance coverage litigation is whether policyholders may pursue discovery of other policies and policyholders to establish a coverage claim. Disputes over such discovery have brought more and more third parties into these cases and have led to increasingly protracted and expensive discovery-related litigation. On Dec. 10, 2008, in a long-running New York insurance coverage case, Mt. McKinley Insurance Co., et al. v. Corning, Inc., et al., No. 02-602454 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. County), Justice Eileen Bransten gave helpful guidance about the outer bounds of such discovery. Justice Bransten denied discovery of extrinsic evidence, reiterating the scope of the long-established New York rule that extrinsic and parole evidence is not admissible to create an ambiguity in a written agreement that is complete, clear and unambiguous on its face. The court ruled that to obtain such third-party discovery, the threshold question is whether the requesting party has alleged an ambiguity; if not, then discovery of extrinsic evidence is impermissible.
New York's Latest Cybersecurity Commitment
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the Office
A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.
Bit Parts
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
Risks of “Baseball Arbitration” in Resolving Real Estate Disputes
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel
'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.