Commercial Division Blog

Posted: January 28, 2018 / Categories Commercial, Appeals

Transcripts and Videos of Arguments in the Court of Appeals for January 2018 Now Available

On December 24, 2017, we noted four cases of interest from the oral arguments before the Court of Appeals in January 2018:

  1. Forman v Henkin APL-2016-00222 (argued on Tuesday, January 2, 2018) ("Disclosure--Discovery and Inspection--Scope of disclosure--social media--whether a personal injury plaintiff may be compelled to produce photographs privately posted on Facebook and authorizations related to plaintiff's private Facebook messages.") See the transcript and the video.
  2. Dormitory Authority v Samson Construction APL-2016-00202 (argued on Thursday, January 4, 2018) ("Negligence--Architect's Malpractice--Whether Dormitory Authority may pursue a negligence claim against the architect in addition to its breach of contract claim arising out of damages incurred during site excavation for the construction project's foundation; parties--whether City of New York, a nonparty to the underlying construction contract, can assert a claim as a third-party beneficiary as ultimate end-user of the building to be constructed.") See the transcript and the video.
  3. Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp. v Bonderman (and three related actions) APL-2017-00014 (argued on Tuesday, January 9, 2018) ("Parties--Standing--Whether indenture trustee had standing to assert causes of action for breach of contract, fraudulent conveyance, unlawful corporate distribution, unjust enrichment, and based on an alter ego theory; corporations--disregarding the corporate entity--whether complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action under a veil-piercing theory.") See the transcript and the video.
  4. Paramount Pictures Corporation v Allianz Risk Transfer AG APL-2016-00221 (argued on Tuesday, January 9, 2018) ("Judgments--Res Judicata--Application of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 13(A) to New York State court cases; whether a party's failure to assert a compulsory counterclaim in a prior federal action precluded the party from pursing the counterclaim in a subsequent state court action under the doctrine of res judicata.") See the transcript and the video.