<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NY Daily Record &#187; Appellate Division, Third Dept.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/category/case-digests/appellate-division-third-dept/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nydailyrecord.com</link>
	<description>Since 1908</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 00:14:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Legal Malpractice: Sevey v. Friedlander&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/19/legal-malpractice-sevey-v-friedlander/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/19/legal-malpractice-sevey-v-friedlander/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 21:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divorce Settlement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfavorable Terms]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/19/legal-malpractice-sevey-v-friedlander/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Legal Malpractice Divorce Settlement —Unfavorable Terms Sevey v. Friedlander 509959 Appealed from Supreme Court, Tompkins County Background: In 2002, the plaintiff retained the defendant Betty D. Friedlander of the defendant Friedlander and Friedlander PC to represent him in his divorce action. Prior to trial, the divorcing parties negotiated a settlement. A [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/19/legal-malpractice-sevey-v-friedlander/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unemployment Insurance: Matter of Heller v. Paragon Motors of Woodside Inc.&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/unemployment-insurance-matter-of-heller-v-paragon-motors-of-woodside-inc/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/unemployment-insurance-matter-of-heller-v-paragon-motors-of-woodside-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reduction in Commission Rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voluntary Quit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/unemployment-insurance-matter-of-heller-v-paragon-motors-of-woodside-inc/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Unemployment Insurance Voluntary Quit — Reduction in Commission Rate Matter of Heller v. Paragon Motors of Woodside Inc. 510031 Appealed from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board Background: The claimant, a finance manager for an automobile dealership, worked for the employer from February to November 2008, at which time he resigned because [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/unemployment-insurance-matter-of-heller-v-paragon-motors-of-woodside-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Professional Misconduct: Matter of Terrell&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/professional-misconduct-matter-of-terrell/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/professional-misconduct-matter-of-terrell/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[censure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Professional Misconduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Traffic Convictions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/professional-misconduct-matter-of-terrell/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Professional Misconduct Censure — Traffic Convictions Matter of Terrell D-14-11 Background: The respondent attorney was admitted to practice by this court in 1982 and he was previously admitted in New Jersey in 1967, where he maintains an office for the practice of law. In 2010, the New Jersey Supreme Court publicly [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/professional-misconduct-matter-of-terrell/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Child Support: Matter of Wilson v. LaMountain&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/child-support-matter-of-wilson-v-lamountain/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/child-support-matter-of-wilson-v-lamountain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:44:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ability to Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/child-support-matter-of-wilson-v-lamountain/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Child Support Ability to Work — Social Security Disability as Evidence Matter of Wilson v. LaMountain 509689 Appealed from Family Court, Franklin County Background: The parties are the parents of two children, one born in 1990 and the other in 1995. In June 2005, family court registered a child support order [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/child-support-matter-of-wilson-v-lamountain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divorce: Mann v. Mann&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/divorce-mann-v-mann/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/divorce-mann-v-mann/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:43:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Custody — Parental Move to Different School District]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/divorce-mann-v-mann/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Divorce Custody — Parental Move to Different School District Mann v. Mann 509485 Appealed from Supreme Court, Warren County Background: The parties are the divorced parents of two children. Pursuant to their 2007 separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into the 2008 judgment of divorce, they had joint legal [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/18/divorce-mann-v-mann/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Workers’ Compensation: Matter of Sillitti v. Liberty Travel Inc.&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/workers%e2%80%99-compensation-matter-of-sillitti-v-liberty-travel-inc/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/workers%e2%80%99-compensation-matter-of-sillitti-v-liberty-travel-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 21:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COPD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mold]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workers’ Compensation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/workers%e2%80%99-compensation-matter-of-sillitti-v-liberty-travel-inc/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department   Workers’ Compensation Mold — COPD Matter of Sillitti v. Liberty Travel Inc. 510109 Appealed from the Workers’ Compensation Board Background: In 2005, while working for Liberty Travel Inc., the claimant was diagnosed as having chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In 2006, the claimant was transferred to Liberty’s office in the hamlet [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/workers%e2%80%99-compensation-matter-of-sillitti-v-liberty-travel-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Real Property: Tverskoy v. Ramaswami&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/real-property-tverskoy-v-ramaswami/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/real-property-tverskoy-v-ramaswami/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 21:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Damage to Trees and Crops]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stipulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/real-property-tverskoy-v-ramaswami/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Real Property Damage to Trees and Crops — Stipulations Tverskoy v. Ramaswami 510963 Appealed from Supreme Court, Ulster County Background: The plaintiffs commenced this action in 2005, alleging that the defendants Ravi Ramaswami, Marie De La Parte and Saugerties Medical Realty LLC unlawfully removed trees from and caused damage to the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/08/real-property-tverskoy-v-ramaswami/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trespass: Barrett v. Watkins&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/01/trespass-barrett-v-watkins/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/01/trespass-barrett-v-watkins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:48:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Confinement of Trespassers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trespass]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unlawful Imprisonment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/01/trespass-barrett-v-watkins/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Trespass Confinement of Trespassers — Unlawful Imprisonment Barrett v. Watkins 511021 Appealed from Supreme Court, Sullivan County Background: On April 25, 2005, plaintiffs drove to a remote, wooded public recreation area located at the southeast side of the Toronto Reservoir in Sullivan County. When they attempted to leave, they discovered that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/04/01/trespass-barrett-v-watkins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unemployment Insurance: Ingrao-Woods v. Commissioner of Labor&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/25/unemployment-insurance-ingrao-woods-v-commissioner-of-labor/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/25/unemployment-insurance-ingrao-woods-v-commissioner-of-labor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 16:27:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disqualification Where No Profit is Seen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Independent Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment insurance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/25/unemployment-insurance-ingrao-woods-v-commissioner-of-labor/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Unemployment Insurance Independent Business — Disqualification Where No Profit is Seen Ingrao-Woods v. Commissioner of Labor 510411 Appealed from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board Background: In August 2007, claimant started an online business providing bereavement support products over the Internet. She made an initial investment of $25,000, $16,000 of which was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/25/unemployment-insurance-ingrao-woods-v-commissioner-of-labor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Breach of Contract: Richmor Aviation Inc. v. Sportsflight Air Inc.&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/21/breach-of-contract-richmor-aviation-inc-v-sportsflight-air-inc/</link>
		<comments>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/21/breach-of-contract-richmor-aviation-inc-v-sportsflight-air-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:51:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daily Record Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Dept.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breach of contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Modification of Trial Court’s Finding on Facts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Third Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/21/breach-of-contract-richmor-aviation-inc-v-sportsflight-air-inc/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellate Division, Third Department Breach of Contract Modification of Trial Court’s Finding on Facts Richmor Aviation Inc. v. Sportsflight Air Inc. 509735 Appealed from Supreme Court, Columbia County Background: In June 2002, the defendant entered into a contract with the plaintiff pursuant to which the plaintiff would provide exclusive use of a single Gulfstream IV [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2011/03/21/breach-of-contract-richmor-aviation-inc-v-sportsflight-air-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
