The plaintiff argued that his employer, Advanced Healthcare, had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when it allegedly terminated him on January 30, 2009. The plaintiff claimed he was a qualified individual with a disability under the ADA because his renal cell carcinoma (which was in remission at the time of the alleged termination)

Please click the link below to view “Contractors Entitled To Jury Trial In Mechanics’ Lien Foreclosure Cases.” Adobe Reader is required to view the bulletin. If Adobe Reader is not installed on your PC, click here to download and install.

Contractors Entitled To Jury Trial I Mechanics’ Lien Foreclosure Cases

Reprinted with permission from the

Stranger-originated life insurance (“STOLI”) policies have emerged in large numbers over the last decade and now comprise a growing segment of the insurance market. In a typical STOLI arrangement, speculators collaborate with an individual to obtain a life insurance policy in the name of that individual, and then sell some or all of the death

Insurer Must Defend Restaurant Owner In Suit Following Fight At Party

A restaurant employee fatally stabbed a guest and injured another person at a party hosted at the restaurant by the owner. The Appellate Division, First Department, agreed with one insurer that it had no duty to defend or to indemnify the restaurant owner

Section 1132(g)(1) of ERISA states that in an action under ERISA, such as one by an employee to obtain benefits pursuant to an employer’s disability income insurance plan, the court, in its discretion, may allow reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of action to either party. This past May, in Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Ins.

The midterm elections, now just two days away, have been marked by explosive growth in the use of Web 2.0 tools such as online social networking and blogging in an effort to garner support and electrify voters.

The sophisticated nature of today’s political campaigns makes the results of a recent survey by the Coalition Against

Insured’s Assignees May Not Bring Bad Faith Action Against Insurer Where Insured Could Not Assert That Claim

Personal injury plaintiffs obtained a judgment against a restaurant, which assigned them its rights against its insurer. The plaintiffs, as the restaurant’s assignees, then brought suit against the insurer, arguing that it had refused in bad faith

Richard Smith was employed by Bonetti Company, Inc., and participated in the group life insurance plan that the company provided. Smith had basic life insurance coverage of $50,000 and supplemental life insurance coverage of $50,000, and he designated Alma, to whom he was married at the time his application for coverage was accepted, as the

Almost a century ago, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the importance of the “insurable interest” requirement in connection with life insurance policies. In Grigsby v. Russell, the Court explained that, “[a] contract of insurance upon a life in which the [policy owner] has no interest is a pure wager that gives the [policy owner]

Several weeks ago, New York County Civil Court Judge Arthur F. Engoron issued a decision in Quality Psychological Services PC v. GEICO Ins. Co.,[1] a case involving multiple actions filed by a medical provider seeking payment of bills it had sent to an insurance carrier for psychological services allegedly rendered to the plaintiff’s assignors, who