Highlights of this Program Include:
· December 21, 2024 amendment to CPLR 3020(a) regarding verification.
· Second Department warns courts not to issue sua sponte dismissals
· How does one challenge a sua sponte order?
· The new CPLR 515 addressing "Venue in matrimonial actions"
· Amendment to CPLR 2111 regarding e-filing in all civil courts
· CPLR 2309(c) amended to alleviate burdens when oath and affirmations are taken outside the State
· Court of Appeals enforces nursing home’s contractual venue provision
· First Department holds that reasonable production costs for nonparty witness include reasonable fees charged by outside counsel and e-discovery consultants
· Plaintiffs who failed to establish compliance with CPLR 5003-a denied the entry of a judgment awarding them interest on the total amount of the two settlement payments
· Court of Appeals holds that it “evaluate[s] timeliness for purposes of [taking an appeal] on a party-by-party basis.”
· Court of Appeals holds that in e-filed action, service of appellate division order denying motion for leave to appeal is properly performed on NYSCEF site
· Court of Appeals, in application to serve late notice of claim, addresses whether the participation of a city’s employees in an intentional tort provides a city with actual knowledge of essential facts constituting the claim
· Court of Appeals addresses whether an entity that acquires another entity’s assets and liabilities also inherits that entity’s jurisdictional status under CPLR 302
· Court of Appeals addresses whether a verified pleading has evidentiary value when the verifier does not have personal knowledge of the facts
· Court of Appeals addresses the procedure under CPLR 4511 for taking judicial notice of a foreign country’s law
· Court of Appeals addresses whether a motion to vacate under CPLR 5015 is the exclusive path for bringing a Judiciary Law Section 487 claim for attorney fraud
· Court of Appeals addresses whether collateral estoppel bars plaintiff’s claims in New York action over which federal court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
· Second Department holds that failure to properly serve an order to show cause deprives court of jurisdiction to entertain the motion
· First Department rules that plaintiff is permitted to plead claims based on both negligence and intentional conduct that arise out of the same set of facts
· Second Department rules that it cannot review denial of plaintiff’s informal request to amend complaint
· Second Department holds that e-filed deposition transcript cannot be considered part of the record on a motion where its docket number was not provided
And much more...