Filter This View

  • June 21, 2021 | Corporate Counsel

    Should Tech Companies Be Prepared for More Secret Subpoenas?

    Experts also say recent furor over subpoenas of data on lawmakers and others is indicative of ever-increasing concern over privacy rights among both customers and in-house lawyers.

    5 minute read

  • Appellate Division, First Department: June 17, 2021

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Appellate Division, Second Department, Appeals & Motions
    Judge: Unsigned
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: DOCKET

    Appellate Division, First Department: June 17, 2021

  • People v. Kupferman

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court, Kings
    Judge: Justice Esther Morgenstern
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20572V-2019

    People's Certification Validates Certificate of Compliance, Statement of Readiness

  • In the Interest of RW

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Justice Burgess
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 06-21-00012-CV

    Following a bench trial, the trial court terminated mother's parental rights to R.W. on three specified grounds and found termination was in the child's best interest.

  • In the Interest of RDE

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Justice Contreras
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 13-20-00275-CV

    In 2016, the trial court signed a final decree of divorce terminating the marriage of R.E. and M.E. and ordering R.E. to pay $603.25 in child support per month for their two children.

  • Haynes and Boone v. NFTD

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Legal Ethics and Attorney Discipline | Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Boyd
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0066

    This case called on the court to define more precisely the scope of the attorney-immunity defense.

  • In the Interest of JJRS

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Devine
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0175

    Police responded to an incident at a motel involving mother, a prostitute, a client, and mother's boyfriend, and they found mother's children in an adjacent room as well as three bags of methamphetamine and other drugs and paraphernalia.

  • Advanced Technology v. Krenek

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Constitutional Law | Fee Disputes
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Justice Spain
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 14-19-00459-CV

    A company, that filed suit against the mayor of a town for deprivation of constitutional and statutory rights, was able to show that the full amount of awarded attorney fees was unjustified.

  • Kostura v. Judge

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Law Firm Partners
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Appeals
    Judge: Justice Doss
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 07-20-00310-CV

    In 2003, the parties formed a law firm with each partner owning one-third of the firm's shares.

  • In re Atty. Gen. Law Enforcement Directive Nos. 2020-5 and 2020-6

    Publication Date: 2021-06-21
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Rabner
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin D. Jarvis (O’Brien, Belland & Bushinsky, attorneys; Kevin D. Jarvis and Matthew B. Madsen, on the briefs); James M. Mets (Mets Schiro & McGovern and Markman & Cannan, attorneys; James M. Mets and Robert R. Cannan, of counsel and on the briefs, and Brian J. Manetta, on the briefs); Katherine Hartman (Attorneys Hartman, Chartered, Law Offices of Robert A. Ebberup, Law Office of D. John McAusland, and Loccke, Correia & Bukosky, attorneys; Katherine D. Hartman, Mark A. Gulbranson, Jr., Robert A. Ebberup, D. John McAusland, and Michael A. Bukosky, on the briefs); Matthew Areman (Zazzali, Fagella, Nowak, Kleinbaum & Friedman, attorneys; and Markowitz & Richman, attorneys; Paul L. Kleinbaum, Craig A. Long, and Matthew Areman, on the briefs); Frank M. Crivelli (Crivelli & Barbati, attorneys; Frank M. Crivelli, on the briefs)
    for defendant: Jeremy Feigenbaum, State Solicitor (Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney; Jeremy Feigenbaum and Jane C. Schuster, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel and on the briefs, and Christopher Weber, Sean P. Havern, Patrick Jhoo, Brandon C. Simmons, Emily K. Wanger, and Emily Marie Bisnauth, Deputy Attorneys General, on the briefs)
    Case Number: A-26/27/28/29/30-20 (085017)

    Attorney General Directives Requiring Public Release of Law Enforcement Disciplinary Records Consistent with Public Policy Favoring Accountability and Transparency