Med Mal News
May 28, 2004
National news that affects your practice.
Revisiting Pretrial Protocol and Procedure
May 28, 2004
<b>Part Two of a two-part article.</b> In last month's issue, we discussed the defense problem of increasingly high med-mal verdicts. This month, we explore strategies that defendants anticipating their personal day in court should consider if they hope to buck the trend toward high jury verdicts in medical malpractice actions.
How Will It Play in New York?
May 28, 2004
Judge Marilyn O'Connor of Family Court, Monroe County, issued a controversial order in March barring a frequently homeless couple from having any more children until they can show that they will be able to care for the four children they already have.
Breaking Up with Clients
May 28, 2004
Every year or so, divorce lawyer Alton Abramowitz does something that would make many a lawyer lose sleep: He breaks up with a client. He would rather not show clients the door, but, he says, their unrealistic expectations sometimes leave him with no other choice.
Professional Licenses and Equitable Distribution
May 28, 2004
In last month's newsletter, we discussed the issue of the unused professional license and its value, if any, when seeking equitable distribution at the time of divorce. The court in <i>Pino v. Pino</i>, 189 Misc.2d 331 (Sup. Ct. Nassau 2001), for one, has compared equitable distribution to imputed child support and maintenance and concluded that it possesses full authority to calculate the enhanced earning potential from the license and can add that monetary result to the monies to be equitably distributed. But this is a rather unexplored area of the law in New York -- an area ripe for litigation. <b>Part Two of a two-part article.</b>
Student Loan Discharge Proceeding Not a 'Suit'
May 27, 2004
The Supreme Court, in its May 17, 2004 decision in <i>Tennessee Student Assistance Corporation v. Hood</i>, __ U.S. ___ (2004), declined to reach the issue of whether the Bankruptcy Clause in Article I of the Constitution grants authority to Congress to abrogate state sovereign immunity from private suits. Instead, in a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled that a proceeding to determine whether an otherwise nondischargeable student loan can be discharged because of an undue hardship on the debtor is not a "suit" against the state for purposes of the Eleventh Amendment. The Court's decision, written by Chief Justice Rehnquist, turned on the in rem nature of the proceeding and reasoned that the bankruptcy court did not need jurisdiction over the state where it had jurisdiction over the debtor and her property.
