A unanimous panel of the Second Department has rebuked in unusually sharp terms Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Arthur Schack for ignoring "binding precedent" and "improperly" relying on material he gathered from independent research.
March 22, 2013 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
A Brooklyn appellate panel has rebuked in unusually sharp terms a trial judge for ignoring "binding precedent" and "improperly" relying on material he gathered from independent research.
A unanimous panel of the Appellate Division, Second Department, chided Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Arthur Schack (See Profile) for dismissing a foreclosure action only two months after it had reversed him in similar circumstances.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
