The latest cases of importance to your practice.
- March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |As a result of non-eviction co-op conversion plans, many rent-stabilized tenants live in co-operative apartment units. Suppose the apartment's owner overcharges the tenant. May the tenant recover the overcharge from a successor owner who purchased the co-operative unit at a UCC foreclosure sale? That issue, faced by a New York court in Muscat v. Gray (infra page 3 ), raises questions both of statutory construction and public policy.
March 03, 2004Paul M. ShupackA woman who was charged with second-degree aggravated harassment and second-degree harassment, violations of Penal Law '' 240.30(1) and 240.26(3) respectively, for allegedly posting handwritten fliers denigrating her former boyfriend and accusing him of failing to live up to his child-support obligations was exonerated by the court in February.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The latest on what was happening at press-time.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |If you represent globetrotting clients, be careful! Your married "international" clients who may one day be divorced may face great financial dangers ' or alternatively enjoy significant financial opportunities ' as they travel to and live in different countries.
March 03, 2004Jeremy D. MorleyThe courts generally favor keeping children who are American citizens in the United States when deciding custody issues. But, this hurdle is not insurmountable for the foreign-national parent.
March 03, 2004Janice G. InmanBy a 6-3 majority, the United States Supreme Court rejected a claim of reverse discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, finding that Congress in enacting the ADEA concluded that the "enemy of 40 is 30, not 50." General Dynamics v. Cline, 2004 WL 329956 (U.S. 2/24/04).
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |

