Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

New York Real Estate Law ReporterKickerFeaturesSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

New York County Supreme Court Initiates 'Telephonic' Appearances

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
February 09, 2004

Commencing Jan. 5, 2004, the civil branch of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, may permit attorneys to make certain court appearances by telephone in participating parts.

Eligible appearances may include preliminary, compliance and pre-trial conferences, motions and other appearances. Attorneys who wish to appear by telephone must call “CourtCall” at 1-888-882-6878 at least five court days prior to the scheduled appearance. CourtCall will place the attorney appearing by telephone in contact with the court at the required time. Attorneys may appear telephonically even if their adversaries wish to appear in person.

The participating parts include:

Part 31-Hon. Laura Drager

Part 8-Hon. Diane Lebedeff

Part 62-Hon. Doris Ling-Cohen

Part 20-Hon. Joan B. Lobis

Part 12-Hon. Barbara R. Kapnick

Part 53-Hon. Charles E. Ramos

Part 24-Hon. Rosalyn Richter

Part 16-Hon. Alice Schlesinger

Part 1-Hon. Martin Shulman

Part 50L-Hon. Jacqueline W. Silbermann

Part 29-Hon. Stanley L. Sklar

Part 22-Hon. Milton Tingling

Part 26-Hon. Laura Visitacion-Lewis

Part 2-Hon. Louis B. York.

Commencing Jan. 5, 2004, the civil branch of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, may permit attorneys to make certain court appearances by telephone in participating parts.

Eligible appearances may include preliminary, compliance and pre-trial conferences, motions and other appearances. Attorneys who wish to appear by telephone must call “CourtCall” at 1-888-882-6878 at least five court days prior to the scheduled appearance. CourtCall will place the attorney appearing by telephone in contact with the court at the required time. Attorneys may appear telephonically even if their adversaries wish to appear in person.

The participating parts include:

Part 31-Hon. Laura Drager

Part 8-Hon. Diane Lebedeff

Part 62-Hon. Doris Ling-Cohen

Part 20-Hon. Joan B. Lobis

Part 12-Hon. Barbara R. Kapnick

Part 53-Hon. Charles E. Ramos

Part 24-Hon. Rosalyn Richter

Part 16-Hon. Alice Schlesinger

Part 1-Hon. Martin Shulman

Part 50L-Hon. Jacqueline W. Silbermann

Part 29-Hon. Stanley L. Sklar

Part 22-Hon. Milton Tingling

Part 26-Hon. Laura Visitacion-Lewis

Part 2-Hon. Louis B. York.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.