Foreign corporations, open your rolodexes. You will need New York counsel more than ever.

Days ago, New York Senate Bill S7476 was delivered to Governor Hochul for signature. If signed, the bill would make all foreign businesses authorized to do business in New York subject to general jurisdiction in the state’s courts. This is an

Plaintiffs’ counsel rejoice, defense counsel take note, and businesses beware. Daimler has been diminished and businesses are no longer only subject to general jurisdiction in states in which they are incorporated or headquartered.

On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Mallory[1] and held that a business is subject to general jurisdiction

Only weeks ago, the Appellate Division, Second Department issued its McLaughlin decision reaffirming Brash[1] – another Second Department decision which we wrote about on August 4, 2021.[2] As we discussed in our blurb, Brash was significant. Therein, the Second Department held that Governor Cuomo’s Executive Orders during the COVID-19 pandemic “tolled,” rather than “suspended,” New

Think before you book your next business trip to the Empire State. Perhaps that important contract discussion with your counterpart can be accomplished remotely. Although you may miss out on Long Island’s Gatsbyesque mansions, that City “feeling,” or Upstate’s natural grandeur, staying put may just save yourself or your company from being on the wrong

Municipal litigation counsel can continue to sleep soundly. Before the New Year, the New York Court of Appeals, once again, reaffirmed the “special duty” doctrine in Maldovan v. County of Erie.[1]

As any first-year law student learns, the tort of negligence requires a showing that the defendant breached some “duty” owed to the plaintiff. However,

Benjamin Wisher authored the article, “Contracting Around CPLR 202: “Accrual” Borrowing Statute in New York Practice and Why its Current Application is Unworkable,” for the Albany Law Review.

“Amongst New York’s legal practitioners, it is common knowledge that a claim for relief arising under the breach of a contract must be interposed within six years.

On July 1, 2022, Administrative Order 141/22 (“AO 141/22”) became effective, revising many of the previous changes to New York’s Uniform Civil Rules (“Uniform Rules”) made by Administrative Order 270/20 (“AO 270/20”), including the Statement of Material Facts requirement. We extensively covered AO 270/20 in a previous article, and in another article, we discussed how

CPLR 205(a) is a well-known safety net in New York litigation, generally providing that a timely commenced action dismissed without prejudice can be refiled by “the plaintiff” within six months of dismissal, despite the statute of limitations expiring, saving the claim from being untimely. This statute’s reference to “the plaintiff” was recently debated and brought

One would think that the current state of federal law would be clear as to where a plaintiff may commence, and thereafter maintain, his/her action. However, that is not the case; particularly within the Second Circuit, and this ambiguity can create a host of unintended problems, including being forced to litigate an action thousands of

A recent New York Court of Appeals decision clarified the contours of one of the most foundational legal principles: personal jurisdiction.

In Aybar v. Aybar, the Court, in a 5-2 decision, held that foreign corporations (i.e., corporations that are not incorporated under New York law) do not consent to general jurisdiction by registering to do

Whether a partnership, limited liability company, or corporation, it is imperative to know of a business’s legal duties when it is in possession of funds for uncashed distributions.

Under New York Abandoned Property Law, uncashed distributions become abandoned property after 3 years. See New York Abandoned Property Law § 501. New York businesses are not

Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont recently signed into law “An Act Incentivizing the Adoption of Cybersecurity Standards for Businesses” (Public Act No. 21-119). Under the Act, “covered entities” that implement certain cybersecurity measures to protect against data breaches of “personal information” and “restricted information” will be insulated against the imposition of punitive damages arising from tort

In April 2020, in an article entitled, “Coronavirus and Statutes of Limitations in New York: A Lingering Effect?”, we discussed Governor Cuomo’s Executive Order 202.8, issued in the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic. We opined that, based on its language, it served to “toll,” rather than “suspend,” New York’s limitation periods.[1]

On June 2,