Blog

Blog

view:  full / summary

Appellate Attorneys for Fiat Chrysler Denied Review by U.S. Supreme Court Over Cyber Security Case

Posted on 7 January, 2019 at 11:05 Comments comments (0)

Appellate attorneys for Fiat Chrysler will not have their appeal heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in cyber security case. According to the Insurance Journal, the attorneys for the car company were seeking the intervention of the U.S. Supreme Court to have the lawsuit dismissed. With the court's refusal to take the case, it appears the lawsuit will proceed to trial.


The suit stems from allegations that that the UConnect system in the company's cars had a known defect in which cyber criminals could easily hack the system and "take over safety-critical functions such as acceleration, braking, steering and ignition." Attorneys for Fiat Chrysler argue that the defect was fixed in a recall wherein the cars were given a software update remedying the situation. Moreover, the company is arguing that none of the plaintiffs had ever had their cars hacked and therefore have no standing to sue as none of them had actually been harmed. The plaintiffs argued that they would not have paid as much for their cars had they known about the defect and that the defect diminished the resale value of the car.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Criminal Appeal Lawyers for Bill Cosby Allege Numerous Errors Committed by Trial Court on Appeal

Posted on 13 December, 2018 at 11:10 Comments comments (0)

Bill Cosby's criminal appeal attorneys have outlined the trial errors they claim are the basis for Mr. Cosby's appeal. According to Fox News, the appellate attorneys have listed almost a dozen errors committed by the trial court.


According to the article, among these errors were the alleged impermissible use of 404(b) evidence. This type of evidence is only allowed to be used in limited circumstances and the attorneys argue that the evidence did not fit within the limited exception to show a signature crime pattern as the prior bad acts were too remote in time and too dissimilar to fit the exception. Another error alleged is that allegedly Cosby agreed to testify in the civil suit with the victim over a decade ago because he was promised by the prosecution's office that they would not prosecute. Cosby is alleging that he relied on that promise and potentially incriminated himself. The trial court apparently found that the prosecutor's promise not to prosecute was not binding on his successors. 


Written by:    Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:    (646) 942-1798

Email:           [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Appellate Attorneys for Apple file Appeal Seeking to Overturn Ban of iPhone Sales in China

Posted on 10 December, 2018 at 14:55 Comments comments (0)

Appellate attorneys for Apple have filed an appeal seeking to overturn a sales ban of their products in China. According to CNBC, Apple has been involved in a legal battle with a company called Qualcomm for years. Qualcomm is a chipmaker that is alleging patent violations by Apple arguing that Apple violated patents with regard to reformating the size of pictures and managing applications on a touchscreen. According to the article, "two preliminary injunctions were granted Monday by the Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court in China" resulting in a ban of certain Apple iPhones in China.


Apple has appealed arguing "Qualcomm's effort to ban our products is another desperate move by a company whose illegal practices are under investigation by regulators around the world." Apple also claims that the company is alleging three patent violations never raised before and the violations alleged are not part of any of the operating systems in Apple's new phones.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Appellate Attorneys for Selena's Father Win Appeal Refusing to Dismiss Suit Over Use of Her Likeness

Posted on 3 December, 2018 at 10:35 Comments comments (1)

Appellate attorneys for the father of the late singer Selena have won an appeal over the right to use her name and likeness. According to Forbes, Selena's father, Abraham Quintanilla, Jr., brought a lawsuit seeking to stop Selena's husband, Chris Perez, from doing a television show about his relationship with Selena. Perez moved to dismiss the lawsuit and was unsuccessful. Perez then appealed and the appellate court has refused to dismiss the case.


According to the article, Selena's father filed the lawsuit claiming that Perez violated an "estate agreement that gives Quintanilla the exclusive rights to Selena’s name, voice, photographs, her story and other rights in perpetuity." Perez allegedly breached the agreement by writing a book about his life with Selena and entering into a contract to produce the television series. Perez alleges that he signed the estate agreement under duress a few months after his wife's death and should not be bound by its terms.  


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Appellate Attorneys for Adnan Syed Argue Before the Maryland Court of Appeals Regarding Overturning His Conviction

Posted on 30 November, 2018 at 11:00 Comments comments (60)

Appellate attorneys in the Adnan Syed case are again before the Maryland appellate courts. After having won two rounds of appeals, the State is seeking to reinstate the twenty year old murder conviction. According to The Baltimore Sun, the conviction had previously been vacated based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to contact alibi witnesses.


Syed is accused of killing his high school girlfriend and burying her in a public park. The case gained notoriaty when it was featured in a "Serial" podcast. The appellate arguments again centered around the ineffective assistance of counsel claims with the State arguing that if Syed's conviction is allowed to be vacated, other defense counsel will be required to contact every potential witness regardless of the merits of the allegations which could in turn open up other convictions. The attorneys for Syed argued that Syed's trial counsel was explicitly informed about the witness and Syed requested that she be contacted. Despite this request, the defense attorney failed to follow Syed's request.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:    (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Appellate Attorneys for California Win Challenge to Right to Die Law

Posted on 29 November, 2018 at 14:15 Comments comments (0)

Appellate attorneys for the State of California overturned a decision that found California's right to die law was unconstitutional. According to the Press-Enterprise, the right to die law allows for terminally ill patients to end their life with a legal drug. A group of doctors had sued challenging the constitutionality of the law. The lower court found that the enactment of the law was unconstitutional because it was passed during a special session that was limited to health care issues.


The appellate court overturned the decision finding that the physicians did not have standing to bring the lawsuit challenging the law. The court reasoned that the physicians and their patients could opt out of participating whereby they did could not show that they had the requisite standing to proceed with the suit. The appellate court, however, did not rule on the merits of the case as to the constitutionality of the statute itself.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Criminal Appeal Attorneys Overturn Conviction for Insider Trading

Posted on 27 November, 2018 at 17:25 Comments comments (0)

The criminal appeal attorneys for Sean Stewart were able to overturn his conviction for insider trading. According to Forbes, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals found that the district court improperly precluded impeachment evidence warranting a reversal.


Stewart was convicted of insider trading in 2017 after the FBI recorded conversations between Stewart's father and an informant. The informant had profited from inside information and after his arrest agreed to record Stewart's father. Stewart's father was subsequently arrested and accepted a plea deal.


At his trial, the recorded conversations between the father and the informant were used against Stewart. In order to show that he did not have any knowledge that the information he relayed was being used to trade, Stewart's attorney wanted to introduce a post-arrest FBI interview with his father into evidence. Stewart also asked that his father be allowed to testify at his trial with immunity so that the FBI could not prosecute his father for additional charges if he testified. The district court did not permit either form of impeachment evidence. The Second Circuit found that the district court erred in precluding this impeachment evidence finding that it deprived Stewart from mounting a defense.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Appellate Court Finds Defamation Judgment Awarded to Actor Rebel Wilson was Excessive

Posted on 20 November, 2018 at 0:20 Comments comments (0)

Appellate attorneys for media giants have won their appeal against actress Rebel Wilson. According to NBC News, the actress known for her roles in Pitch Perfect and Bridesmaids had won a defamation lawsuit against Bauer Media after a trial "court found a series of articles accusing her of lying about her age, name and childhood events had cost her roles." At the trial level, the actress was awarded $3.5 million.


Following the trial court judgment, Bauer Media appealed and was joined by numerous media companies arguing that the damage award was excessive. The appellate court agreed with the media companies and slashed the damages to $400,000. The court found that there was insufficient evidence in the record to support the damage award reasoning that Wilson failed to prove that the articles prevented her from getting lucrative movie roles.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Appellate Attorneys for Joe Giudice Appeal His Deportation Order

Posted on 15 November, 2018 at 0:45 Comments comments (69)

Appellate attorneys for the Real Housewives of New Jersey reality star Joe Giudice are appealing his deportation order. Joe and his wife, Teresa, previously pled guilty to federal fraud charges. The trial court allowed Teresa to serve her sentence before Joe so that he could care for their children while Teresa was incarcerated. Once Teresa was released, Joe began serving his sentence. Because Joe is an Italian citizen, he is now facing deportation. 


According to NJ.com, he is appealing the deportation order and is seeking to remain in the country. His deportation order requires that he be deported after he is released from serving his prison term. He is scheduled to be released in March.


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:   (646) 942-1798

Email:          [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

NY Appellate Court Makes Overturning Arbitration Awards Based on Manifest Injustice Harder

Posted on 23 October, 2018 at 11:30 Comments comments (176)

The New York appellate courts have just made it harder to overturn arbitration awards. According to Law.com, the appellate court has found that arbitration awards should only be vacated in extremely limited circumstances. While arbitration awards have always been difficult to overturn, the  appellate court ruling has made it clear just how difficult the burden of proof to overturn an award has become.


Because parties agree to arbitrate their claims, this contractual decision to litigate claims in arbitration are usually given full force and effect and the decisions are meant to be binding on the parties. Parties are able to avoid enforcement of arbitration awards when there has been a "manifest injustice" committed. This term "manifest injustice" has been at the center of most litigation involving arbitration awards. The appellate court has made it clear that manifest injustice only applies when arbitrators know the law and completely disregard it stating that manifest injustice occurs when “the arbitrator[s] knew of the relevant principle, appreciated that this principle controlled the outcome of the disputed issue, and nonetheless willfully flouted the governing law by refusing to apply it.” Manifest injustice will not apply, however, when there are errors in law or fact made by arbitrators. Moreover, the appellate court noted "[a]ny suggestion that New York courts will review the arbitrator’s factual and legal determinations, as if on appeal, … will discourage parties from choosing New York as the place of arbitrators.”


Written by:   Alexandra Siskopoulos, Esq.

Telephone:    (646) 942-1798

Email:           [email protected]


Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.


Rss_feed