John Feroleto has been asked to provide continuing legal education to other attorneys by the New York State Trial Lawyers Association October 14. The Decisions seminar is considered by many to be the premier CLE in the sate of New York. on October 14, 2011.
No-Fault Providers Need Not Bill After a Denial
In State Farm v. Domotor 266 A.D.2d 219 (2nd Dept. 1999) the court held that after the no-fault carrier issues a denial of payment there is no need for the medical provider to send bills to the carrier. After the denial the provider can later litigate or arbitrate the bills for services provided after the denial without having to send in bills to the carrier.
Jury Selection: a Few Points on Voire Dire and Trial
From your initial interview with the client, you should begin thinking about your discussion with the jury. What are the strengths/weaknesses to be addressed?
Fourth Department Denies Dismissal of Ski Lift Case
In Tone v. Song Mountain Ski Center (Fourth Department January 2014), the appellate court reversed the trial court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s personal injury action for injuries caused while on a ski lift. The plaintiff sustained injuries while using a triple chair left at defendant’s facility. Defendant claimed that plaintiff assumed the risk of her injuries in utilizing the ski facility when she “willingly engaged in the recreational activity of downhill skiing.”
Jury Must Find Substantial Factor When “An” Injury Is Undisputed In Auto Case
In Herbst v. Marshal, 4th Dept 2011 (CA 11-00326) the Fourth Department upheld the lower Court’s ruling to set aside a jury verdict in favor of the defendant as against the weight of the evidence based on the jury’s finding that the crash was not a substantial factor in causing an injury to plaintiff.
No Right To Object For Non-Party Witness Attorney At Deposition
In Thompson v. Mather, 70 A.D.3d 1436 (4th Dept. 2010) the Court held that an attorney for a non-party witness does not have a right to object to questions asked of his client, or otherwise participate at a deposition.
Attorney Employment Contracts Must Be Fair
As an attorney who practices law involving attorney employment agreements, I have read many cases where the contract is unenforceable because in impinges on the clients’ right to freely chose their counsel. Attorney employment agreements are unenforceable that state that when an attorney leaves a firm and takes firm clients with her, the departing attorney’s portion of the fee will be limited if she informs the firm’s clients she is leaving.
Serious Injury Threshold Motion Does Not Necessarily Require Doctor’s Affirmation.
In Feggins v. Fagard, 52 AD 3d 1221 (4th Dept. 2008) the Court held that in response to a threshold motion plaintiff may rely on unsworn reports and uncertified medical records submitted by defendants or simply referenced in the submitted reports of defendant’s examining physicians.
Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees
As an attorney that handles attorney employment agreement cases I am always interested in cases which impinge upon the clients’ right to counsel.
In Hackett v. Moore, 160 Ohio Misc.2d 107, 2010-Ohio-6298, the court held unenforceable an employment agreement between a law firm and its attorney employee that limited the amount of the fees the attorney would receive from clients who followed him after he left to 5%.
Employment Contracts Must Not Create Financial Disincentives
Often times law firm employment contracts will set forth the amount of the fee the departing attorney is entitled to should current clients go with a departing attorney when she leaves. The amount can never be contingent upon whether or not she informed her clients that she is leaving. She has an ethical obligation to do so. There is much case law regarding this matter. The case law comes from many different jurisdictions.