NY Court of Appeals Expected to Hear In-Person Arguments Once Again
Arguments will be webcast live and the courtroom will be closed to the general public, according to a notice.
May 27, 2020 at 05:19 PM
3 minute read
New York's top court is expected hear in-person arguments on a case June 2, a move that comes after the Capital Region met COVID-19 reopening benchmarks outlined by state officials, according to a court spokesman.
Arguments in four cases are scheduled to be heard June 2, but only one of those cases is expected to be heard in person, said Court of Appeals spokesman Gary Spencer on Wednesday. The other three cases are expected to hold arguments remotely, he said.
The justices will be in a spaced-out seating arrangement June 2, similar to how the state's high court held arguments back in March, Spencer said.
Arguments will be webcast live and the courtroom will be closed to the general public, according to a notice from John Asiello, chief clerk and legal counsel to the court. The document says there will be "appropriate safety protocols" during the June 2020 session.
Earlier this month, state officials gave the Capital Region, which includes the cities of Albany and Troy, approval to reopen parts of its economy following coronavirus-triggered lockdown measures. In part, those benchmarks say that regions must see a continued downturn, or a low number, of hospital deaths or new hospitalizations.
Steven Mintz, a founding partner and general counsel of Mintz & Gold, described oral arguments as critical at the Court of Appeals, saying it can give nuance to points that get lost in written briefs.
Communications signals, like body language and speech intonation, can influence how a point is received, he said. But in court proceedings conducted by telephone or video, those subtleties can be lost, he said.
Stephen P. Younger, a partner at Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, said video court proceedings can make it more difficult to determine the right time to start talking and make it harder to pick up on subtle nuances such as jokes and rhetorical questions.
The case set to be heard in person, captioned Matter of Senzer, involves a review of a determination from the state's Commission on Judicial Conduct.
In that case, the commission in October 2019 recommended that Northport Village Justice Paul Senzer be removed from the bench. According to the commission's determination, he was found to have, in emails, used several derogatory terms to refer to individuals in a visitation matter that he was involved in as an attorney in Family Court.
Lawyers for Senzer in November requested review of that determination by the Court of Appeals.
READ MORE:
|Claimants Against Cities Can't View Each Other's Testimony in Prefiling Hearings, NY Court of Appeals Says
|New York Court of Appeals Hears In-Person Arguments, Observing Social Distancing
|Long Island Judge Recommended for Removal From Office After Emailing Slurs, Vulgar Language to Clients
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 2OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 34th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 4Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
- 5How the Trump II Administration Can Combat Antisemitism
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250