We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 48

New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • September 13 2013

In a business-friendly decision, Perez v. Professionally Green, LLC, 214 N.J. ___ (2013), a unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court held yesterday that a


Mannix v. Tighe, Hutchings v. City of Gardner, and Marmer v. Kaufman
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • March 17 2010

Three recently reported decisions -- two of the superior court -- are worth noting briefly


Agreement for “direct use immunity” did not preclude federal prosecutors from sharing defendant’s incriminating proffer statements with foreign (or state) authorities
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • France, USA
  • June 23 2009

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed that a criminal defendant’s agreement with federal prosecutors not to use against him any statements made by him during proffer sessions did not bar the U.S. Attorney’s Office from sharing his incriminating statements with authorities in France who then used the statements against him in French criminal proceedings


Pantazis v. Fidrych
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • December 30 2008

In the recently-reported decision in Pantazis v. Fidrych, Case No. 02-CV-0919, 2008 Mass. Super. LEXIS 386 (Worcester Super. Ct. Nov. 7 2008), the Superior Court addresses, among other things, its authority to remove a trustee


Gillespie v. Gillespie
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • February 18 2011

First, in Gillespie v. Gillespie, Case No. 09-P-2174, 2011 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 156 (Feb. 7, 2011), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court addressed claims for tortious interference with expectancy of a gift and wrongful death by suicide


Berkowitz v. Berkowitz
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • March 23 2012

In Berkowitz v. Berkowitz, Civil Action No. 11-10483-DJC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31487 (D. Mass. March 9, 2012), the U.S. District Court denied a motion to dismiss a complaint alleging breach of an oral trust


Rochalski v. Sklodowski
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • January 11 2012

In Rochalski v. Sklodowski, Case No. 10-P-1750, 2012 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 12 (Jan. 6, 2012), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court affirmed the probate court's judgment voiding certain transactions on grounds of lack of capacity and undue influence


It's a bird! It's a plane! It's an attorney-client waiver opinion!
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • May 1 2012

Privileged documents produced in response to a grand-jury subpoena cannot be withheld in subsequent civil litigation (even litigation about Superman), according to this opinion from the Ninth Circuit


A DPA ain’t immunity
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • August 25 2010

Criminal defendants can introduce evidence that they rejected an offer of immunity to show consciousness of innocence, but not evidence that they rejected an offer of a deferred-prosecution agreement, says one court of appeals


White collar roundup - October 2013
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • October 1 2013

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in United States v. Vilar set off a spate of interest by ruling Morrison v. National Australia Bank