Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In Gleason v. Gleason, 26 N.Y.2d 28 (1970), the Court of Appeals heralded the benefits to society from the 1966 Divorce Reform Law, which repealed New York's “ancient divorce laws, which for almost 200 years sanctioned divorce solely for adultery.” Among the new grounds was the conversion divorce based on living apart for more than one year following a written and acknowledged agreement ' New York's closest brush with no-fault divorce up to that point.
The 1966 grounds persisted as the exclusive basis for divorce in New York for 44 years, notwithstanding the national no-fault trend that swept through the other 49 states. But, as every New York attorney knows, on Aug. 13, 2010, New York ended its distinction as the final frontier to embrace wrongdoing as the exclusive criterion for terminating defunct marriages. The legislature, nevertheless, preserved traditional fault based divorces, perhaps to shield religious or other concerns, such as immigration.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.