Wednesday, December 31, 2008


The 2d Department recently agreed with the 3d Department in holding that a Hold Harmless Provision “was clearly intended to encompass a situation like the one at hand.” Meirowitz v. Bayport-Bluepoint Union Free School Dist., 2008 WL 5376578, at *1 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 2008) (citing Elmira Teachers' Assn. v. Elmira City School Dist., 53 AD3d 757, 760 (3d Dep't 2008), lv denied 11 NY3d 709) -- which ABL discussed here

These cases show the importance of including releases and hold harmless provisions in contracts -- including salary reduction agreements associated with 403(b) plans.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Service of process via Facebook!

ABL wanted to be the first to serve someone via a social networking website, but was beaten to the punch by an Australian attorney.

This method of service is viable under CPLR 308(5) and/or FRCvP 4(e)(1) or 4(f)(3).

What is your best story of service? ABL has served process via e-mail. The most interesting tale of SOP involved a dodgy chap avoiding service. His selective reclusivity irked the Sheriff, who then stopped in at odd hours, and eventually served him at the Nantucket vacation home on Labor Day weekend.

* * *

In Seeming First, Aussie Court Says Default Judgment Can Be Served on Facebook
Posted Dec 15, 2008, 01:06 pm CST By Martha Neil
Updated: In an apparent first in Australia and, possibly, the world, a judge has OK'd a plan to serve a default judgment on a non-appearing defendant via a social networking website.
Although service previously has been allowed by e-mail and text message, a master of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory has gone a step further into the Internet world by allowing a default judgment to be served on Facebook, reports the Sydney Morning Herald.
The court okayed the Facebook approach, a Herald Sun article explains, after all other efforts failed, according to attorney Mark McCormack, who represented the creditor side in the mortgage foreclosure case.
"The Facebook profiles showed the defendants' dates of birth, email addresses and friend lists--and the co-defendants were friends with one another," he tells the Herald Sun. "This information was enough to satisfy the court that Facebook was a sufficient method of communicating with the defendant."
To convince the court to try Facebook, the plaintiffs had to show that no other method of service would work, and that the Facebook effort was reasonably likely to succeed, he says.
"Australian courts are regarded as being amongst the most technologically advanced in the world, and this innovation goes to further that claim," the Sydney Morning Herald writes.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

you better be good, you better watch out . . .

The new ethics rules take effect 4/1/09 (they had to pick April Fool's Day?).

See the cliff notes in the attached press release.

Thursday, December 04, 2008

Federal Evidence Blog - ABL's blog of the month

OK, I do not highlight a good blog every month, but it is catchier than saying the blog of the alternating fifth fortnight.

This blog links to 5 Fed. Evid. Rev. 1454-66, 1471 (Oct. 2008), which contains a good discussion of the new FRE 502 -- governing attorney-client privilege.