Jones Day Obtains Victory in Robare Case
Law Firm News
[##_1L|1069687944.jpg|width="60" height="48" alt=""|_##]
In Robare, the New York Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the trial court's order granting defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that all causes of action against the defendant cigarette manufacturers, including Firm client R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, were barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The issue on appeal was whether equitable estoppel prevented defendants from asserting the statute of limitations defense. Absent such estoppel, the plaintiff's claims were clearly time barred.
Plaintiff initiated his action against defendants in August of 1997, well beyond the three-year statute of limitations. He argued that defendants should be equitably estopped from asserting the statute of limitations defense based on various news items he either read or saw regarding the defendants' statements about smoking. The court held that the doctrine of equitable estoppel was inapplicable because plaintiff had timely awareness of all appropriate facts to permit him to make further inquiry before the limitations period expired, and because he either could not have reasonably relied on the news items he claimed to have seen in light of his admitted knowledge of the health risks of smoking, or that news constituted nothing more than mere denials of wrongdoing insufficient to create an estoppel. The court also found that there was no special relationship between plaintiff and defendants that would create a fiduciary relationship obligating defendants to inform plaintiff of the facts underlying his claim. Accordingly, the dismissal of plaintiff's action was unanimously affirmed.
Reynolds was represented by Harold Gordon and Daniel Russo in the New York office.
Related listings
-
White & Case Honored in Russia
Law Firm News 04/19/2007[##_1L|1087837290.jpg|width="148" height="23" alt=""|_##] Corporate Lawyer, Russia's largest monthly legal journal, presented three awards to law firms in Russia, recognizing their contributions to the legal community. "White & Case received this...
-
Schwartz Simon Leases 43,150 SF in Morristown
Law Firm News 04/17/2007The law firm of Schwartz, Simon, Edelstein, Celso & Kessler leased 43,150 square feet of office space in the Washington Office Center, a 215,037-square-foot office building at 44 Whippany Road in Morristown, NJ. The firm expects to take occupancy...
-
Renowned White Collar Attorney Joins McDermott
Law Firm News 04/16/2007[##_1L|1401698766.jpg|width="158" height="61" alt=""|_##] The international law firm McDermott Will & Emery announced today that renowned white-collar defense attorney and trial lawyer Abbe D. Lowell is joining the Firm as a partner and will head...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.