Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A New York appeals court rejected a Manhattan boutique law firm's attempt to dismiss a malpractice action against it, finding that questions remained as to whether the statute of limitations for the claim was tolled and if the firm received sufficient notice about a bankruptcy that prevented its client from collecting a judgment. The malpractice lawsuit arose out of legal representation in a dispute over celebrity memorabilia.
Examining plaintiff Frank Basile's argument that New York's three-year statute of limitation to bring a malpractice suit against The Law Offices of Neal Brickman was tolled under the continuous representation doctrine, a five-judge panel from the New York Appellate Division, First Department, wrote that various "factual contentions" must be resolved during discovery, not at the pre-answer motion-to-dismiss stage. Basile v. The Law Offices of Neal Brickman P.C., 157431/20 (2022).
Basile argues the limitations period for his $750,000 legal malpractice case had been tolled, under common-law doctrine, "based on alleged emails and telephone conversations" he'd had with the Brickman firm for nine years regarding the collection of a 2010 judgment in his favor from a civil fraud suit in which the firm represented him.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The business-law issue of whether and when a corporate defendant is considered distinct from its affiliated entities emerged on December 11 at the U.S. Supreme Court, with the justices confronting whether a non-defendant’s affiliate’s revenue can be part of a judge’s calculation of the monetary remedy for the corporate defendant’s infringement of a trademark.
The most forward-thinking companies embrace AI with complete confidence because they have created governance programs that serve as guardrails for this incredible new technology. Effective governance ensures AI consistently aligns with an organization’s best interests, safeguarding against potential risks while unlocking its full potential.
It’s time for our annual poll of experts on what they expect 2025 to bring in legal tech, including generative AI (of course), e-discovery, and more.
AI’s rapid market proliferation and regulatory expansion mirrors privacy’s, and businesses should model their contractual AI compliance on the successes of privacy law’s DPA and BAA.
Traditional keyword strategies and ranking tactics are losing ground to a more dynamic approach in which optimizing for search now means optimizing for every platform and user interaction. This evolution is appropriately being called “Search Everywhere Optimization.” The redefined SEO reflects how AI is not just changing how people find information but also how businesses need to think about visibility in an increasingly connected digital ecosystem.