In <i>Rosario v. Diagonal Realty, LLC</i> (<i>infra</i>), the Court of Appeals addressed an issue that has perplexed New York courts since Congress amended the section 8 housing program almost ten years ago: Can a landlord terminate its participation in the program at the expiration of a rent-stabilized lease? The Court of Appeals held that the rent stabilization code prohibits termination, and that federal law does not pre-empt the code.
Is there a trend in child support modification matters? The cases we looked at in last month's newsletter granting an upward modification of child support appear clearly to be the exceptional ones.
Jurisdiction in a matrimonial action has several statutory components requiring the repeated cross-application of the Civil Practice Law and Rules with the Domestic Relations Law (DRL). Knowledge of the statutes' interplay becomes especially essential to the matrimonial attorney when seeking to affect the status of the marriage and obtain jurisdiction over a non-resident.
The author has spent some considerable time reading and re-reading the Court of Appeals' decision in <i>Keane v. Keane</i>, 3 NY3d 115 (2006), but cannot quite get it. He realizes fully that the court's word on this is the final one ' 'for now.'
To address existing irrevocable life insurance trusts (ILITs) in the context of a divorce, there are five steps that practitioners must take. The first four were addressed in Part One of this article: Collect Documents; Analyze Current Circumstances and Facts; Establish Insurance Objectives; and Review Existing ILIT to See If and How Objectives Can be Achieved. The conclusion discusses the fifth step.
Have you ever had cases that you felt were appropriate for collaboration, where the clients and lawyers got started but then the clients disengaged from the collaborative process somewhere along the way? This article explains the value of a divorce coach in the collaborative process.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.
“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.
Insiders (and others) in the private equity business are accustomed to seeing a good deal of discussion ' academic and trade ' on the question of the appropriate methods of valuing private equity positions and securities which are otherwise illiquid. An interesting recent decision in the Southern District has been brought to our attention. The case is <i>In Re Allied Capital Corp.</i>, CCH Fed. SEC L. Rep. 92411 (US DC, S.D.N.Y., Apr. 25, 2003). Judge Lynch's decision is well written, the Judge reviewing a motion to dismiss by a business development company, Allied Capital, against a strike suit claiming that Allied's method of valuing its portfolio failed adequately to account for i) conditions at the companies themselves and ii) market conditions. The complaint appears to be, as is often the case, slap dash, content to point out that Allied revalued some of its positions, marking them down for a variety of reasons, and the stock price went down - all this, in the view of plaintiff's counsel, amounting to violations of Rule 10b-5.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
While the DOJ Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative is still in its early stages and cybersecurity regulations are evolving, whistleblower plaintiffs have already begun leveraging the FCA to pursue alleged noncompliance with government cybersecurity requirements.
