LIMITATION OF LIABILITY COMPLAINT (ADMIRALTY)
Little-known wrinkle in Federal Admiralty & Maritime Law allows potential defendant to limit his potential liability to the value of the subject vessel. **Extremely useful to insurance/subrogation lawyers.
NY Notary Public All-Purpose Acknowledgement Certificate
ANSWER AND JURY DEMAND
Defendant’s answer to Plaintiff’s complaint and defendant’s jury demand.Â
DEFENDANT’S COMBINED REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF LAW, AND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO THE CONDUCT
Defendant’s combined reply in support of motions for summary judgment, motion for determination of law, and motion for partial summary judgement as to the conduct of a person.Â
DEFENDANT’S FIFTH MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING NAME VALUATIONS
Defendant’s fifth motion in limine regarding valuations performed by a person that is an expert witness for plaintiff.Â
DEFENDANT’S FOURTH MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING NAME
Defendant’s fourth motion in limine regarding conduct, advice, actions or inaction of plaintiff’s witness.Â
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF LAW
Defendant’s pursuant to C.R.C.P 56, makes the motion for determination of law: pursuant to C.R.C.P. 121, undersigned counsel certifies conferral with counsel for plaintiff who objects to the relief requested in this motion.Â
DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR DIRECTED VERDICT
Defendant’s motion for directed verdict under C.R.C.P 50.
DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF FIFTH MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING MILLER VALUATIONS
Defendant’s motion to ask the court to prevent plaintiff’s from introducing the testimony from their expert witness.Â
DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF ORDER ON FIRST MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING HYPOTHETICAL SETTLEMENT SCENARIOS
Defendant submits a reply in support of its motion for clarification of the order on defendant’s first motion regarding hypothetical settlement scenarios.Â
DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING PEV AND RESERVE INFORMATION
Defendant’s reply in support of second motion regarding the prevention of plaintiff from introducing evidence, testimony, or argument regarding the pure exposure value (PEV) or reserve information for the expert witness.Â