Legal Opinion
Nobile v. Schwartz
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 28, 2003No. 98 Civ. 2375(RWS)PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
The plaintiff Angelo Nobile (“Nobile”) has renewed his motion for partial summary judgment with respect to his malpractice claims against individual defendants Milton Schwartz (“Schwartz”) and Paid E. Kerson (“Kerson”), and law firm defendants Grant, Hermann, Schwartz & Klinger (“Grant Hermann”) and Leavitt, Kerson & Leffler (“Leavitt Kerson”) (collectively, the “Defendants”). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied, factual issues having been presented.
Prior Proceedings
This action was filed on April 2, 1998 by Nobile against Schwartz and his firm,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Rodriguez v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- In re the Estate of BarabashNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Gibbs-Alfano v. BurtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wolfson v. BrunoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- Stonewell Corp. v. CONESTOGA TITLE INSURANCE CO.District Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- Centauri Shipping Ltd. v. Western Bulk Carriers KSDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- State Street Associates, L.P. v. New York State Urban Development Corp. (In Re State Street Associates, L.P.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. New York · 2005
- Rubens v. MasonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.