Bankruptcy Judge to Step Down in 2025
Judge James L. Garrity Jr. will remain active on the court to wind down his current caseload until he steps down on Sept. 30, 2025, the Manhattan bankruptcy court announced.Manhattan US Attorney Damian Williams Announces Resignation From Office
Williams said he would step down at 11:59 p.m. on Dec. 13. Current Deputy U.S. Attorney Edward Kim will succeed him.Hochul Vetoes Bill Meant to Alleviate Public Notaries' Paperwork in Non-Electronic Acts
To the dismay of New York’s largest bar association, Governor Kathy Hochul recently wielded her veto pen on legislation aimed at rolling back a series of additional record-keeping requirements placed on non-electronic notary acts in 2023. Hochul said on Friday she was compelled to veto A7241A/S8663 to protect consumers.Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
The author writes "To American lawyers it has been fairly obvious that digital assets are 'property' for legal purposes, but the English have not been so sure. In fact, England has been so not sure that recently it felt compelled to introduce legislation to help resolve the point. And yet even then, this proposed legislation would not actually confirm that digital assets constitute “property,” but rather just provide that it is not out of the question that they might."Section 1782 Practice Pointers From Recent Decisions
The authors state "Section 1782 (28 U.S.C. §1782) is an international litigation issue that this column has been writing about for decades. In today’s column, we provide some Section 1782 practice pointers based on a number of recent decisions."Trade Fixtures In New York Eminent Domain Cases - What Qualifies and How Are They Valued?
The author states "New York courts have consistently held that the proper method of valuation for trade fixtures is reproduction cost less depreciation. This means that each fixture item is valued based on the cost of reproducing that item as of the time of the eminent domain seizure, less the depreciation of such item, to arrive at its sound value."The Empty Promise of ‘Dubin v. United States’
Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. §1028A to impose stricter penalties on aggravated identity theft, but its ambiguous language has allowed prosecutors to apply it broadly, often leading to disproportionate sentences for crimes not fitting the traditional understanding of identity theft. In their article, Andrew Mancilla and Robert Fantone discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Dubin v. United States which aimed to curb this overreach.Trending Stories
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