As any seasoned commercial litigator knows, courts are generally loathe to overturn the independent decisions of arbitrators.
New York County Commercial Division Justice Charles E. Ramos recently examined the standard for doing so in Daesang Corp. v NutraSweet Co., a dispute arising from Daesang Corporation’s attempted $79,250,000 sale of its aspartame business to iconic
Several weeks ago, we reported on some recent updates to Manhattan Commercial Division Justice Bransten’s individual practice rules. New York commercial litigators should take note of some recent changes in the Queens County Commercial Division as well.
According to an official announcement from the Queens County Commercial Division, as of April 3, 2017, all Commercial
A motion for leave to renew must be based upon new evidence or a change in the law that would change the prior determination and must contain a reasonable justification for failure to present such facts on the prior motion. If the new material proffered in the motion would not change the prior determination, a
CPLR 3211(a)(1) provides for the dismissal of a claim so long as the defense is based upon “documentary evidence”. We’ve seen this used successfully in mortgage note cases, (e.g., Bronxville Knolls, Inc. v. Webster Town Center Partnership, [1st Dep’t 1995]), as well as lease litigation (e.g., 150 Broadway N.Y. Assocs., L.P. v. Bodner