FINDLAW:Daily Opinion Summaries for New York Court of Appeals - 11/25/08

| No Comments

******************
Court of Appeals Rules on "Attorney Approval" Clauses in Real Estate Contracts:

CONTRACTS, ETHICS & PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE

Moran v. Erk, No. 176
Where a real estate contract contains an attorney approval contingency providing that the contract is "subject to" or "contingent upon" attorney approval within a specified time period and no further limitations on approval appear in the contract's language, an attorney for either party may timely disapprove the contract for any reason or for no stated reason. Judgment for plaintiffs is reversed.

******************


CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE

People v. Hawkins, No. 175
In consolidated but otherwise unrelated criminal appeals, both convictions are affirmed where defendants did not properly preserve for appellate their challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence.



CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE

People v. Jean-Baptiste, No. 174
Reduction of conviction to manslaughter in the second degree is affirmed where, because the Appellate Division properly applied the present standard for depraved indifference murder, the evidence introduced at trial was not legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of depraved indifference murder.


CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE

People v. Castellano, No. 173
Order affirmed where defendant's argument that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction for depraved indifference murder is unpreserved for this Court's review.


CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE

People v. George, No. 172
Order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, where contrary to the People's contention, defendant properly preserved for our review his challenge to the legal sufficiency of his depraved indifference murder conviction.


INSURANCE LAW, PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE

Continental Casualty Co. v. Stradford, No. 180
In an action to determine whether plaintiff-insurer timely disclaimed coverage in defense of two dental malpractice actions on the basis of defendant's non-cooperation, grant of summary judgment to defendants is reversed where issues of fact remain with respect to the timeliness of plaintiff's disclaimer.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Leonard E. Sienko, Jr. published on November 26, 2008 3:23 PM.

FINDLAW:Daily Opinion Summaries for New York Court of Appeals - 11/24/08 was the previous entry in this blog.

New HUD-1 Form is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Monthly Archives

Pages

Powered by Movable Type 5.11