Fishkin Lucks secured a voluntary dismissal with prejudice today of third-party coverage claims brought against our client, AIG, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The claims sought coverage under a municipal policy that AIG issued to the City of Long Branch (NJ) for an alleged tort committed by a Long Branch employee. The dismissal was the product of admissions we secured through aggressive discovery, and was accomplished before AIG had to submit to discovery.
Fishkin Lucks secured a victory today before the New York State Division of Human Rights in a suit brought against the Firm’s client, a luxury hotel owner/operator, by a former employee alleging that she was terminated on account of her pregnancy. In dismissing Complainant’s charge of discrimination, the Division agreed with the Firm’s arguments that the client discharged Complainant for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons that were not a pretext for discrimination.
The Supreme Court of New York (New York County) granted today the Firm’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint against our client, a national life insurance company, which alleged that the client breached the terms of a life insurance policy, violated federal tax laws, engaged in fraud and was negligent when, instead of paying out the policy’s death benefits to the decedent’s designated beneficiaries, including plaintiff, it offered a spousal continuation option to the decedent’s husband who thereafter divested plaintiff of his interest under the policy. In dismissing the complaint with prejudice, the Court agreed with the Firm’s arguments that each of plaintiff’s claims were time barred, including under a ‘discovery rule’ which plaintiff argued saved the claims.
Fishkin Lucks is pleased to announce that Steven Lucks was named a 2014 “Rising Star” in the area of Civil Litigation by NJ Super Lawyers®, a magazine and rating service for the legal community. Super Lawyers® bestows the “Rising Star” designation upon “the top up-and-coming attorneys in the state” who are 40 years old or younger. The selection process is a multi-phased, rigorous combination of peer nomination and review by an attorney-led research team. Lawyers throughout the State nominated Steve based on their first-hand observations of him in the courtroom, including as opposing counsel and co-counsel. Less than 2.5 percent of lawyers under the age of 40 are selected for this prestigious honor.
In a complete victory for our client, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Irizarry, J), today granted our motion for summary judgment in its entirety. The Court awarded our client, a national life insurance company, judgment against its former agent for commissions and other costs the former agent owed arising from its sale of life insurance policies that were thereafter declared void ab initio following the client’s discovery of material misrepresentations in the policy applications. The Court’s decision also dismissed with prejudice the former agent’s counterclaims for additional commissions it claimed it was owed, and awarded our client its costs, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in pursuing collection of the commissions and costs.
Fishkin Lucks scored another victory today on behalf of our client, Banco Popular North America (“BPNA”), in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Garaufis, J.). Plaintiff brought suit in the Supreme Court of New York (Kings County Commercial Division) alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and fraud claims against BPNA arising from a construction loan issued to an LLC of which Plaintiff was a member. Several months later, the LLC filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, and Plaintiff removed the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334(b) and 1452(a) on the ground that it related to the bankruptcy proceeding. Once removed, Plaintiff moved the Eastern District to refer the action to the bankruptcy court. Our Firm opposed referral to the bankruptcy court and moved the Eastern District to abstain and remand the action to the Kings County Commercial Division pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 (c)(1), (c)(2), or 1452(b). Agreeing with our argument that the action is a non-core, but related to, proceeding, accepting Plaintiff’s stipulation that BPNA met five of the six elements necessary to apply mandatory abstention under 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c)(2), and finding over Plaintiff’s objection that BPNA showed the sixth and final element, the Eastern District denied Plaintiff’s motion to refer the action to the bankruptcy court and granted BPNA’s motion to abstain and remand the matter to the Kings County Commercial Division. Immediately after receiving the Eastern District’s decision, we filed a motion for summary judgment on BPNA’s behalf in Kings County.
