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 61

Employer's law blog - court orders production of notes prepared by plaintiff, not on request from counsel
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • April 26 2012

The New Jersey Appellate Division recently held that handwritten notes prepared by a plaintiff before she met with her attorney are not protected by the attorney-client privilege and must be produced in discovery, where the notes were not prepared at the attorney’s direction or under his supervision


"It vexes me. I'm terribly vexed."
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • September 4 2012

The Hyde Amendment gives criminal defendants the chance to win attorney's fees and costs when "the court finds that the position of the United States was vexatious, frivolous, or in bad faith."


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


Connecticut's proposed rule on registration of in-house counsel due for vote of judges
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • June 25 2007

With all the things that a Connecticut company's in-house counsel has to worry about, being accused of practicing law without a license should not be one of them


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


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


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


Married same-sex couples entitled to spousal coverage
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • March 17 2014

On March 14, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Center for Consumer Information and Oversight issued guidance requiring health insurance


IRS issues DOMA guidance
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • August 30 2013

On August 29, 2013, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) issued Revenue Ruling 2013-17 (the “Revenue Ruling”) providing guidance on the effect of the


Common-interest privilege confirmed in the garden state
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2014

The Supreme Court of New Jersey unanimously endorsed broad protections for the common-interest privilege in O'Boyle v. Borough of Longport. There