Libraries are bridges to information and knowledge.

BANKING LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, SECURITIES LAW Morrison v. Nat’l Australia Bank, Ltd., No. 070583 In a securities matter involving defendant-foreign bank, dismissal of claims is affirmed where court did not have subject matter jurisdiction based on the fact that: 1) the fraudulent statements at issue emanated from defendant’s corporate headquarters in Australia; 2) the complete lack of any effect on America or Americans; and 3) the lengthy chain of causation between defendant’s acquired lending company’s actions and the statements that reached investors.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE US v. Oberoi, No. 044545 Conviction for mail fraud and health care fraud is affirmed over claims of error that defendant was denied a speedy trial in violation of the Speedy Trial Act on the grounds that: 1) the pre-indictment delay exceeded 30 days; and 2) the pretrial delay exceeded 70 days.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE US v. Kapelioujnvy, No. 073353 Conviction for conspiracy to sell stolen property is reversed where: 1) the government failed to prove that the defendant believed that the stolen property was worth at least five thousand dollars; and 2) the government failed to prove the defendant was involved in a conspiracy involving goods that moved in interstate commerce. .

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW Crawford v. Liz Claiborne, Inc., No. 145 “In a suit under the Human Rights Law alleging that plaintiff’s employer discriminated against him based on sexual orientation, reversal of summary judgment for defendants is reversed and remanded where defendants’ summary judgment motion was timely under the then-applicable local rule.”

CIVIL PROCEDURE, FAMILY LAW, JUDGMENT ENFORCEMENT Farkas v. Farkas, No. 144 :In an action pursuant to a divorce, reversal of judgments in favor of wife regarding a debt secured by the couple’s shares in their co-op apartment, on the basis that wife’s submission of a proposed judgment was untimely, is reversed where the prior proposed judgments were not subject to a 60-day time limit on submission”

Update from the Lexis Alert Service, Search run morning of October 23-24, 2008:

1. People v. Peralta, 4143, 514/07, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2008 NY Slip Op 7170; 54 A.D.3d 653; 2008 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7008, September 30, 2008, Decided, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

The People of the State …

Attacking Adverse Experts

Stephen D. Easton

“The is a step-by-step guide to investigating, evaluating, and attacking the adverse expert in civil cases. It outlines tactics you can use to gather information about the adverse expert, both in the discovery process and on your own to: take an effective expert deposition; evaluate the adverse expert’s analysis of the key issues; move to exclude his testimony; cross-examine him effectively when he testifies at trial; handle voir dire, opening statement, closing argument, and even to successfully handle appeals regarding experts. Includes CD-ROM of time-saving checklists and citations to dozens of critical rules, statutes, cases, and other law.”

FROM THE OFFICES OF LESLEY ELLEN HARRIS Copyright, New Media Law & E-Commerce News

NOTE: THIS CONTENT IS BEING REPRODUCED FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSES ONLY.

__________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

The fall issue of the State Court and County Law Libraries (SCCLL) Newsletter has been published at:

http://www.aallnet.org/sis/sccll/pdfs/news/2008fall.pdf

There is an inoperable hyperlink on page 12. The link to the article “Law Libraries Keep FOL in $titches” is: http://www.friends-library.org/about/footnotes2008/footnotes-0808.pdf

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.

CIVIL PROCEDURE, ETHICS & PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE Tydings v. Greenfield, Stein & Senior, LLP, No. 154 In a legal malpractice action by the former trustee of a grantor trust against the law firm that represented her in a proceeding to compel an accounting, reversal of dismissal on collateral estoppel grounds is affirmed where: 1) collateral estoppel does not prevent relitigation of a ruling that was an alternative basis for a trial-level decision, where an appellate court affirmed the decision without addressing that ruling; and 2) when a trustee resigns, the statute of limitations governing an action to compel her to account runs from the date the trusteeship is turned over to a successor trustee.

CIVIL PROCEDURE, GOVERNMENT LAW, PER CURIAM In the Matter of City of Elmira v. Doe, No. 142 In a civil proceeding to vacate a sealing order, appellate court order is affirmed where some of the sealed records were not official records subject to a CPL 160.50 seal.

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING US v. DeFilippo, No. 071618 Conviction and sentence for conspiring to racketeer, illegal gambling, and conspiring to collect credit through extortionate means is affirmed where: 1) though lower court erred in admitting certain testimony by a witness and his sentencing challenges, the error was harmless; 2) the district court appropriately considered murder to be relevant conduct under the Guidelines; 3) there was no support for defendant’s assertion that incarceration created a rebuttable presumption of withdrawal from a conspiracy; and 4) the district court did not abuse its discretion by resolving the dispute over attorney’s fees without a hearing.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE US v. Luna, No. 073018 Judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict for a cocaine-distribution conspiracy is reversed and remanded where there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s determination that the defendant not only had a buyer-seller relationship with the head of the conspiracy but also knowingly and intentionally joined in and participated in the conspiracy. .

Contact Information