Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

5 opinions for “Renert v. Lee”

Matter of Merrillpublic domain

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024-03-27 · Published · cited 0× · 207 N.Y.S.3d 690; 2024 NY Slip Op 01713

Matter of Merrill (2024 NY Slip Op 01713) Matter of Merrill 2024 NY Slip Op 01713 Decided on March 27, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Per Curiam. Published by New York State Law Reporting Burea

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · find the judge →

Matter of Blattpublic domain

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023-08-02 · Published · cited 1× · 193 N.Y.S.3d 324; 217 A.D.3d 113; 2023 NY Slip Op 04120

Matter of Blatt (2023 NY Slip Op 04120) Matter of Blatt 2023 NY Slip Op 04120 Decided on August 2, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Per Curiam. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pu

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · find the judge →

Matter of Pelsingerpublic domain

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018-08-29 · Published · cited 0× · 2018 NY Slip Op 5929

Matter of Pelsinger (2018 NY Slip Op 05929) Matter of Pelsinger 2018 NY Slip Op 05929 Decided on August 29, 2018 Appellate Division, Second Department Per Curiam. Published by New Y

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · find the judge →

In re Galassopublic domain

New York Court of Appeals · 2012-10-23 · Published · cited 22× · 19 N.Y.3d 688; 978 N.E.2d 1254

OPINION OF THE COURT Per Curiam. Petitioner instituted a disciplinary proceeding against respondent attorney Peter J. Galasso alleging 10 charges of professional misconduct. The essence of the petition is that respondent failed to properly supervise the firm’s bookkeeper resulting in the misappropriation of client funds and that he breached his fiduciary duty by failing to safeguard those funds. Although we

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · find the judge →

Kotterman v. Killianpublic domain

Arizona Supreme Court · 1999-01-26 · Published · cited 61× · 972 P.2d 606; 193 Ariz. 273; 288 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 5; 1999 Ariz. LEXIS 8

972 P.2d 606 (1999) 193 Ariz. 273 Penny KOTTERMAN, Panfilo Contreras, Frieda Baker, Rev., Dr. Gerald S. Degrow, Joanne Hilde, Michael J. Hoogendyk, Pastor Stanley Jones, Jann Renert, Louis Rhodes, James Ullman, and Rabbi Joseph Weizenbaum, Petitioners. v. Mark W. KILLIAN, in his official capacity as Director of the Arizona Department of Revenue, Respondent, Lisa Graham Keegan, in her capacity as Superintendent of Publi

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · find the judge →