In a case which garnered significant media attention, Ken Fink of Cheriff & Fink represented a young woman who was violently struck by a Jaguar driven at high speed in reverse on a quiet Brooklyn thoroughfare. Mr. Fink who handled the case through conclusion was interviewed on multiple occasions regarding the case. See DWI VICTIM TAKES GIANT STEP - LEARNING TO WALK AFTER LOSING LEG, JAG GAL'S ORDEAL - BATTLES AFTER LOSING LEG AND SUES DRIVER, JAG CRACKHEAD - HIT-RUN GAL IN CELL WITH COKE PIPE: DA, and DWI VICTIM TAKES GIANT STEP - LEARNING TO WALK AFTER LOSING LEG
New York, New York, August 2003 - Bruce J. Cheriff of Cheriff Cheriff & Fink, P.C. was awarded an AV rating by Martindale-Hubbell. This is the highest peer rating awarded by the prestigious Martindale-Hubbell organization. The Martindale-Hubbell AV rating indicates very high to preeminent legal ability and very high ethical standards as established by confidential opinions from members of the Bar. Generations of lawyers have relied on Martindale-Hubbell as the authoritative resource for information on the worldwide legal profession. With a history spanning more than 133 years, the Martindale-Hubbell Legal Network is currently powered by a database of over one million lawyers and law firms in 160 countries.
New York, New York, April 2002 - Kenneth S. Fink of Cheriff Cheriff & Fink, P.C. was awarded an AV rating by Martindale-Hubbell. This is the highest peer rating awarded by the prestigious Martindale-Hubbell organization. The Martindale-Hubbell AV rating indicates very high to preeminent legal ability and very high ethical standards as established by confidential opinions from members of the Bar. Generations of lawyers have relied on Martindale-Hubbell as the authoritative resource for information on the worldwide legal profession. With a history spanning more than 133 years, the Martindale-Hubbell Legal Network is currently powered by a database of over one million lawyers and law firms in 160 countries.
New York, New York, January 31, 2002 - A nationally distributed magazine owner ("Defendant") retained Bruce J. Cheriff of Cheriff Cheriff & Fink, P.C. to oppose a National Publisher's ("Plaintiff") attempt to prevent its Magazine from publishing with any publisher other than Plaintiff and to enjoin Defendant from using the bipad or any portion of the U.P.C. label associated with the publication of the Magazine. Cheriff Cheriff & Fink, P.C. successfully defeated the Plaintiff's motion for a Temporary Restraining Order. Shortly thereafter, the parties settled out of court. The magazine continues to be distributed nationally with a new publisher.
New York, New York, July 11, 2001 - In an unusual case recently resolved by Ken Fink of our office, a client of ours sustained an exacerbation of a pre-existing back injury when she tripped and fell in a New York City supermarket. While trip and fall cases are never routine, this case initially seemed fairly straightforward and uncomplicated. After contacting the store, we were put in touch with its liability insurance carrier in the hopes that our client's claims could be resolved in an amicable fashion. After exchanging medical records it became clear that a lawsuit would need to be commenced in order to resolve the case. Our office filed suit, served the Summons and Complaint upon the defendant store, and awaited an answer. A courtesy copy, as is our practice, was sent to the insurance company. The time in which a defendant must serve its answer came and went, and no papers or calls were received by our office. While this is common in cases involving uninsured defendants, it is unusual to have a carrier ignore a lawsuit as happened here. We filed a motion with the Court seeking a Default Judgment against the defendant for their failure to answer. Once again we served the papers and sent courtesy copies to the carrier. The carrier continued to ignore the lawsuit and we were granted a default judgment by the Court. At an Inquest, Bryan G. Schneider, Esq., was granted an award of $1,000,000.00, well in excess of the true value of the case, but appropriate nonetheless given the defendant's failure to appear in the action. We later entered judgment against the defendant store. We began the arduous task of attempting to locate the defendant's assets to satisfy the judgment. Having been apprised of the judgment, the defendant apparently contacted its carrier wondering why the lawsuit had been ignored. The carrier, recognizing the error of its ways, contacted our office to attempt to settle the case while plotting a strategy to vacate the judgment. Ultimately, the case was settled by Kenneth S. Fink, Esq. for $425,000.00. This figure was significantly more than we could have hoped to recover, given the facts of the case, had the defendant's carrier not neglected its duty to defend. By patiently plotting a litigation strategy and deftly responding to unforeseen events in this case, we were able to obtain an award for our client which well exceeded both our expectations and those of our client.
New York, New York, January 5, 2000 - A survey of the most requested decisions published in the New York Law Journal in 1999 contained a noteworthy decision in an action handled by our office. Our office successfully made a motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of a Plaintiff in an personal injury action arising out of a motor vehicle accident. The decision, Pesavento v. Schloendorn, NYLJ CDS#92700309, 3/10/99, was the fifth most requested Law Journal opinion of the year. Click here to see the list as published in the Law Journal. If you would like a copy of the decision, or need more information, please contact our office by phone or email. For more information regarding this and other cases, please visit our "Jury Verdicts" page.
New York, New York, March 1995 - In a matter recently concluded by our office, Bruce J. Cheriff successfully tried an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York before the Honorable Judge Loretta A. Preska to obtain a significant judgment on behalf of our client against a corporation and individuals for a debt owed by a different organization and individual. See Kirby v. Kazan, et al. 94CIV1176. Our client came to us for assistance in collecting on a judgment in the sum of $103,557.71 obtained against a New York Corporation ("Husband Inc.") in Massachussetts. We assisted our client in restraining a bank account of Husband Inc. at which time Husband Inc. continued to conduct its hair salon business by forming a new corporation ("Wife Inc."). Subsequently, we instituted suit against both corporations, as well as Husband and Wife individually, alleging fraudulent conveyances. The defendants maintained that no fraudulent conveyances had taken place and that the transfer was to satisfy an antecedent debt that Husband Inc. owed to Wife. The Court disgreed with the defendants following a two day trial and found that the transfer was made for the specific purpose of shielding Husband Inc.'s assets from our client's judgment and as such was fraudulent. Following entry of the new judgment, we successfully collected in excess of $95,000.00 from the defendants in settlement of this matter.
If you would like a copy of the decision, or need more information, please contact our office by phone or email.
No comments:
Post a Comment