The Appellate Division has held that “Documentary evidence” under CPLR 3211(a)(1) is quite limited
Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 2010 NY Slip Op 02743 (2d Dept. 2010) “[t]he case law is somewhat more abundant as to what is not “documentary
Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 2010 NY Slip Op 02743 (2d Dept. 2010) “[t]he case law is somewhat more abundant as to what is not “documentary
Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 2010 NY Slip Op 02743 (2d Dept. 2010) “[t]he case law is somewhat more abundant as to what is not “documentary
Shady Grove v. Allstate Dave Gottlieb has posted extensively on this case, and has some good insights on it. This case represents a course in Civil
Amercure Acupuncture, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 20098 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2010) SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE
Amercure Acupuncture, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 20098 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2010) SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE
St. Vincent Med. Care, P.C. v Country Wide Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 50488(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2010) 1. Fee Schedule “While defendant argues that
Bandler v Liberty Chevrolet, Inc., 2010 NY Slip Op 50475(U)(App. Term 1st Dept. 2010) Many people, I guess because of the volume of interlocutory appeals that
Bennice v Randall, 2010 NY Slip Op 02253 (4th Dept. 2010) This was a summary jury trial in a 5102(d) matter – no fault’s increasingly grumpy
Mallards Dairy, LLC v E&m Engrs. & Surveyors, P.C., 2010 NY Slip Op 02213 (4th Dept. 2010) “Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and,
Another owner of a medical facility, who improperly used the affirmation device, succumbed to Defendant’s summary judgment motion based upon the medical necessity defense. Doshi Diagnostic
It looks as if an objector to a stamped signature or a computer generated signature needs to present some evidence that the signature is not holographic
It looks as if an objector to a stamped signature or a computer generated signature needs to present some evidence that the signature is not holographic