Just a reminder, and a re-print from the Kellner’s, from the Law Journal. New deposition rules start October 1, 2006. “The deposition is probably the most useful discovery tool in civil litigation. However, it has always been necessary to strike a balance in its use between open and expansive discovery and appropriate limitations so as to protect witnesses from improper questions. In recent cases, the courts have expressed frustration at being called upon to resolve specious objections and curtail plainly improper obstruction of depositions. In an effort to correct certain abuses in the conduct of depositions, the Uniform Rules for the Trial Courts have been amended to add a new section containing rules for the conduct of depositions in the state courts. This section, Part 221: Uniform Rules for the Conduct of Depositions will take effect on Oct. 1, 2006. These rules augment the CPLR by addressing issues of continuing concern”

Jarndyce v. Jarndyce was a Dicken’s fabulation found in Bleak House. The story goes that a battle in Chancery Court over an inheritance went on so long that the legal fees depleted the entire estate.

Here, in this story, is the modern analog. A suit for legal fees blossoms into a 7 year war, going from $ 30,000 to $ 300,000. Read it.

This is probably a once in a decade kind of case, but here is an assistant district attorney, on the cusp of retirement, and dating the complaining witness. He has the power of arrest [if she does not cooperate in prosectution], all of which makes for a superheated atmosphere. Wasn’t this a movie somewhere? Now the girlfriend/complaintant sues for legal malpractice. Details.

Anthony Lin, in the http://NYLJ.com today reports on a matter we wrote about long ago: “Judge Dismisses Malpractice Claim Against Herrick Feinstein A state judge has thrown out a legal malpractice suit against Herrick, Feinstein. The law firm had been sued by former client James Agate, who claimed Herrick Feinstein lawyers Anthony Jakoby and Harvey Feuerstein’s failure to present evidence on damages led him to receive a lower-than-expected award in a breach-of-contract arbitration before the National Association of Securities Dealers. But Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Louis York (See Profile) said the 4,839 pages of records from the arbitration proceeding showed that Messrs. Jakoby and Feuerstein presented ample evidence, including expert testimony, in support of Mr. Agate’s position. In dismissing the complaint, the judge also said the plaintiff was unable to show that malpractice was the proximate cause of his economic loss. Justice York noted that the NASD arbitrators, who awarded Mr. Agate $344,000, did not offer any explanation for their decision and could not be compelled to provide one. “Accordingly, there is no basis to assert that some failing by Herrick caused the arbitrators to rule as they did,” he said. Agate v. Herrick, Feinstein, 104289/05, will be published Wednesday.” – Anthony Lin