In Cushman v. Folan, Case No. 09-P-894, 2010 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1135 (Oct. 19, 2010), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court addressed the procedural question of whether an appeal of a fees award in probate court was properly dismissed with respect to one of the appellants ("Cushman") for her failure to post a bond to secure the judgment, as ordered by the probate court. The more interesting aspect of this case from our perspective, however, relates to the fees award itself.Cushman was one of a number of objectors/plaintiffs in a will contest that was consolidated with a related equity action. Although Cushman filed a motion for voluntary dismissal of her objections and for leave to withdraw on the day that trial began, and although the probate court allowed Cushman to withdraw, the court noted that Cushman might nevertheless be held liable for any fees that were later awarded. The remaining plaintiffs proceeded through trial and judgment was entered against them. They and Cushman were subsequently held jointly and severally liable for fees and costs totaling nearly $575,000 pursuant to G.L. c. 215, § 45. Therefore, Cushman's last-minute withdrawal, after having participated in the litigation up until the beginning of trial, did not protect her from a fee-shifting award.
Day Pitney Newsletter
Clifford Nichols wrote an article, "When Addressing Cybersecurity and Data Breach, Don't Forget eDiscovery," for New Jersey Law Journal. The article is about how companies should consider eDiscovery and litigation response issues when making policy or infrastructure changes to address cybersecurity and data breach risks.
Day Pitney Press Release
Rick Sanders is quoted in an article, "Business Groups Encouraged by Legislators," in NJBIZ, which addresses political activity behind a bill to phase out New Jersey's estate tax. Under the bipartisan bill, the estate tax, which currently applies to inheritances valued at $675,000 or more, would be eliminated gradually over a five-year period. "It affects such a small part of the population," Sanders said. "It just strikes me as unusual that all of a sudden, this bill came. I think it's not coincidental that the governor was campaigning for president at the time he called for the repeal. For years and years, there's been proposals to increase the exemption to $1 million and it never got any traction in New Jersey."
Boston, Mass., January 20, 2016 – Day Pitney is pleased to announce Jillian Hirsch, a partner in Day Pitney’s Litigation Practice, has been selected as one of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly’s 2015 Lawyers of the Year. Honorees were nominated by their colleagues, clients and other legal professionals for their outstanding professional accomplishments.
Boston, Mass. November 11, 2015 – Day Pitney is pleased to announce Leiha Macauley, a partner in Day Pitney’s Individual Clients Practice, has been selected as a 2015 Boston Rising Star by The National Law Journal.
Jillian Hirsch was quoted in an article, "Trust divisible in divorce despite possible new beneficiaries," in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. In the article, Hirsch, who represented the wife in the matter, explains why the Appeals Court's decision of Pfannenstiehl v. Pfannenstiehl is significant.
"It confirmed that an interest in a trust with an ascertainable standard--specifically one with a history of distributions woven into the fabric of the marriage--is a vested, presently enforceable interest and therefore properly included in a marital estate for purposes of equitable division of property in a divorce," she said.