In the article "Thinking About Settlements: Should Retirement Plans Be Discounted for Taxes?" published in the June issue of <i>New York Family Law Monthly</i>, I explained that retirement plans are complex assets, comprised of both tax-deferred (asset) and taxable (liability) components. Because of this complexity, I explained that the true value of these assets is context-dependent and closely tied to the financial situation of the ultimate owner. Attempting to divide these assets equitably in the one-dimensional environment of the yellow legal pad is not without peril.
<b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</i></b>In last month's article, we explained that divorce psychology remains in its infancy, and that, given the extreme complexity of the psychological issues at hand in custody matters, it is no surprise that our discipline in this area is evolving. However, that does not mean there are not real problems at hand. This month's article continues the discussion about the debate currently surrounding certain developmental theories that are often the central underpinnings of custody recommendations.
<b><i>'Overreaching' Added to Case Law</i></b> Justice Anthony J. Falanga of the Supreme Court, Nassau County has added another twist to the case law fixing dates for the valuation of marital property when a previous action for divorce is abandoned.
In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.
This article reviews the fundamental underpinnings of the concept of insurable interest, and certain recent cases that have grappled with the scope of insurable interest and have articulated a more meaningful application of the concept to claims under first-party property policies.
That the pace of change is "accelerating" is surely an understatement. What seemed almost a near certainty a year ago — that law firms would fully and permanently embrace work-from-home — is experiencing a seeming reversal. While many firms have, in fact, embraced hybrid operations, the meaning of hybrid has evolved from "office optional," to an average required 2 days a week, to now many firms coming out with four-day work week mandates — this time, with teeth.
This year at Legalweek, there was little doubt on what the annual takeaway topic would be. As much as I tried to avoid it for fear of beating the proverbial dead horse, it was impossible not to talk about generative AI, ChatGPT, and all that goes with it. Some fascinating discussions were had and many aspects of AI were uncovered.
RPAPL ' 1331 and RPAPL ' 1403 Notices of Pendency are requisite elements for foreclosing a mortgage. <i>See, Chiarelli v. Kotsifos</i>, 5 A.D.3d 345 (a notice of pendency is a prerequisite to obtaining a judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action); <i>Campbell v. Smith</i>, 309 A.D.2d 581, 582 (a notice of pendency is required in a foreclosure action under RPAPL Article 13). In contrast, an ex parte CPLR Article 65 Notice of Pendency (the "Notice") is not required but it is a significant tool in an action claiming title to, or an interest in or the use or enjoyment of, another's land. The filer does not have to make a meritorious showing or post a bond. Article 65 provides mechanisms for the defendant-owner to vacate the Notice that caused an unilaterally imposed restraint on its realty. But, recent case law establishes the near futility of such efforts if the plaintiff has satisfied the minimal statutory requisites for filing the Notice.
