Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 3 No. 187 Decisions Released Oct. 3, 1995 STATE COURT CASES ATTORNEY/CLIENT — FEES 04-2-6650 Alter & Alter, a N.Y. partnership v. Julie Friedman, et al., App. Div. (8 pp.) The motion judge correctly granted N.Y. law firm’s second summary judgment application — giving full faith and credit to and enforcing a N.Y. judgment for counsel fees — since the motion judge on the first application had given the clients ample opportunity to vacate the N.Y. judgment in the N.Y. courts and that attempt was rejected on the merits. EDUCATION 16-2-6651 Bd. of Education of Carteret Borough, et al. v. State of N.J., et al., App. Div. (3 pp.) Although the judge below correctly found that boards of education should have first brought to the Department of Education their challenged to the state’s failure to designate them as special needs districts, the dismissal of the action is reversed and the matter transferred to the DOE. FAMILY LAW 20-2-6652 Edna L. Pharaon v. Joseph J. Pharaon, App. Div. (14 pp.) The judge’s determination of father’s child support obligation was proper, since (1) although the divorce judgment awarded joint physical and legal child custody to both parents, the actual daily arrangement is no different from a traditional one, and utilization of the child support guidelines was correct, (2) although wife was adjudicated “under-employed,” the trial judge properly took this into account and imputed income in the alimony award, and did not utilize this factor in the child support award, and (3) financial help wife receives from her relatives to help her meet expenses is not “in kind” income and was properly excluded by judge. LAND USE 26-2-6653 Patricia Hoehler, et al. v. Bd. of Adjustment of Carteret Borough, et al., App. Div. (10 pp.) Where a three-car garage attached to a residence had been allowed as a pre-existing, non-conforming use, but the owner thereafter began using the garage to store vehicles and equipment used in his plumbing business, the trial judge properly found this to constitute an expansion and change in use and he was justified in overturning the board of adjustment decision. REAL ESTATE — CONDOMINIUM LIENS — ATTORNEY FEES 34-2-6654 Buckingham Towers Condo. Assn. I, Inc. v. Parvin Katarfaer, etc., App. Div. (4 pp.) The trial judge correctly denied condo association’s request for attorney’s fees, because the bulk of the legal services rendered were not in prosecution of the condo lien claim, for which such fees are allowed by statute, but rather were related to defendant’s counterclaim and other related damages issues. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE 14-2-6655 State v. David A. Cuadrado, App. Div. (5 pp.) When the judge had previously ruled that any evidence regarding the defendant’s alias was inadmissible — since it had no bearing on the case and could be potentially prejudicial — the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a new trial when it was discovered that certain prejudicial evidence concerning the alias had mistakenly been seen by the jury on the rear of a prosecutorial exhibit. FEDERAL COURT CASES BANKRUPTCY 42-7-6656 In re: Shahid M. Siddiqui, Debtor; State of N.Y. v. Shahid M. Siddiqui, U.S. Dist. Ct. (9 pp.) Where debtor had pled guilty to charges of grand larceny for fraudulent Medicaid billing practices and entered into a stipulated agreement in open court to settle a related civil case brought by the state of N.Y., the bankruptcy judge properly found the settlement valid, over debtor’s attempt to repudiate it, since substantial consideration flowed to each party, and therefore the judge’s determination of the amount of this non-dischargeable debt is affirmed. LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — BANKING — PENSIONS 25-7-6657 Stuart Coven v. Anchor Savings Bank FSB Retirement Plan, etc., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (20 pp.) Where plaintiff was terminated from his position as bank president one day before the effective date of the bank’s merger, but was paid through the day of the merger, he was legally an employee of the new bank and subject to its retirement plan, and, since there is no evidence that the employee benefits committee acted arbitrarily or in bad faith in denying plaintiff a lump sum payment, the plan’ motion for summary judgment is granted. LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — WIRETAPPING 25-7-6658 Lawrence V. Pascale, et al. v. Carolina Freight Carriers Corp., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (14 pp.) Where employer had a theft problem at its cargo terminal and installed tape recorders on its business phones in an attempt to catch an employee suspected of participating in the thefts, the employer’s interception of unsuspected employees’ telephone calls did not come within the business extension exception of either the federal or state anti-wiretap statutes, and those employees (the plaintiffs) are granted summary judgment on liability. [For publication. Available in Library, 3rd Circuit]

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.