Category Archives: Litigation

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

The COVID-19 pandemic has fomented lawsuits relating to frustration/impossibility of performance, taking of property by Executive Order, and insurance coverage for casualty losses. But our Courts must still hear and determine less consequential, non-recurring fact-specific disputes. And, as a recent case illustrates, what would appear to be rather banal to some is “essential” to others.

Ellen Mathias and Enrico Dealessandrini brought suit arising from their almost $1m renovation of PH-2B at 200 Riverside Drive–more $800K under a construction contract; in excess of $156K in change orders; and over $32K in direct payments to subcontractors.

This was originally published on the SGR Blog.

Was Grandparent Member of  Grandchild’s Immediate Family?

Answer Dispositive of Bystander “Zone of Danger” Claim

The question presented: may a grandparent, who was in close proximity to her grandchild at the time of the death-producing accident, pursue a claim for bystander recovery under a “zone of danger” theory?

The “zone of danger” rule to “allow[s] one who is . . . threatened with bodily harm in consequence of the defendant’s negligence to recover for emotional distress” flowing only from the “viewing [of] the death or serious physical injury of a member of [that person’s] immediate family”. Unsettled were “the outer limits” of the phrase “immediate family”. The Court of Appeals was not asked to fix permanent boundaries of the “immediate family.” Instead, the Court was simply to determine whether a grandchild may come within the limits of her grandparent’s “immediate family,” as that phrase is used in zone of danger jurisprudence.

This was originally published on the SGR Blog.

Was “Mike” Bloomberg  Personally Liable For Alleged Transgressions of Supervisor at His Eponymous Firm?

Court of Appeals Addresses Question of  Owner/Leaders Vicarious Liability Under NYC Human Rights Law

GARCIA,  J. :

An employee of Bloomberg L.P., using the pseudonym “Margaret Doe,” sued Bloomberg L.P., her supervisor Nicholas Ferris, and Michael Bloomberg, asserting several causes of action arising from alleged discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual abuse. The question before the Court of Appeals was whether Bloomberg, in addition to Bloomberg L.P., could be held vicariously liable as an employer under the New York City Human Rights Law based on his status as “owner” and officer of the company. Was Bloomberg an “employer” within the meaning of the City HRL, and could Bloomberg be held vicariously liable for Ferris’s offending conduct.

This was originally posted on the SGR blog.

Court Nixes Grossly Disproportionate Liquidated Damages:

Landlord Not Entitled to $1M+ for Tenant Default of $175K

The Court of Appeals recently considered the enforceability of a liquidated damages provision in a commercial lease Surrender Agreement between  Columbia University, one of the City’s premier universities, and D’Agostino Supermarkets, a family-owned food market chain founded in 1932. As a general matter, parties are free to agree to a liquidated damages clause provided that the clause is neither unconscionable nor contrary to public policy.

But were the damages sought by Columbia grossly disproportionate to the amount due from D’Agostino upon full performance of the Surrender Agreement? Supreme Court and the Appellate Division struck the provision as an unenforceable penalty in contravention of public policy. D’Agostino appealed.

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

“Murder (He) Wrote”

Did that Suffice for a Conviction?

An incarcerated felon asked an inmate in an adjacent cell (whose was days away from release and whose girlfriend faced eviction from her apartment) to kill his wife and mother-in-law and kidnap his children (after he left prison)– in return for which he would be given a house. Detailed written and verbal  information and instructions followed; but the neighboring cellmate informed the authorities and the crime never took place.  Was the felon guilty of attempted murder?

Feinman, J. (for the Court)

A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if the person’s conduct comes “dangerously close” to committing the intended crime. In a recent case, the Court of Appeals examined whether the evidence in a case was in/sufficient to support convictions for attempted murder in the first and second degrees. Did the defendant and his feigned confederate take any actual step toward accomplishing defendant’s plan to kill his wife and mother-in-law beyond mere conversations and planning?. irm.