Court of Appeals Title
   
Advanced Decision Search
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer

Home Certified Questions (500.27)

Below is a listing of Rule 500.27 certified questions pending before the Court, stating the issue(s) certified and their status. Please call the Clerk's Office if you have any questions.

For those certified questions that proceed to briefing in the normal course, the briefing schedule generally will be: appellant's brief to be filed 60 days after the Court accepts the certification; respondent's brief to be filed 45 days after the date set for the filing of appellant's brief; and a reply brief, if any, to be filed 15 days after the date set for the filing of respondent's brief.

The Court welcomes motions for amicus curiae participation from those qualified and interested in the subject matter of these certified questions. Please refer to Rule 500.23 and direct any questions to the Clerk's Office.


ERIC M. BERMAN, P.C., et al. v CITY OF NEW YORK, et al.

By order entered October 29, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following questions to this Court:

"1. Does Local Law 15, insofar as it regulates attorney conduct, constitute an unlawful en- croachment on the State's authority to regulate attorneys, and is there a conflict between Local Law 15 and Sections 53 and 90 of the New York Judiciary Law?

2. If Local Law 15's regulation of attorney conduct is not preempted, does Local Law 15, as applied to attorneys, violate Section 2203(c) of the New York City Charter?"

On November 20, 2014, the Court accepted the certified questions.  The case is being briefed.


SCHOENEFELD v STATE OF NEW YORK et al.:

By order entered April 8, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following question to this Court:

"Under New York Judiciary Law ยง 470, which mandates that a nonresident attorney maintain an 'office for the transaction of law business' within the state of New York, what are the minimum requirements necessary to satisfy that mandate?"

On May 6, 2014, the Court accepted the certified question. The case is being briefed.


COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, & c., et al. v MORGAN STANLEY & CO., INCORPORATED, et al.:

By order entered October 31, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following questions to this Court:

"Based on the declarations and documentary evidence presented by Commerzbank, could a reasonable trier of fact find that DAF validly assigned its right to sue for common law fraud to Dresdner in connection with its sale of Cheyne SIV notes? If so, based on the record established in the summary proceedings in the district court, could a reasonable trier of fact find Morgan Stanley liable for fraud under New York law?"

On November 20, 2014, the Court accepted the certified questions.  The case is being briefed.


BEARDSLEE, & c., et al. v INFLECTION ENERGY, LLC, et al:

By order entered July 31, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following questions to this Court:

"1. Under New York law, and in the context of an oil and gas lease, did the State's Moratorium amount to a force majeure event?

2. If so, does the force majeure clause modify the habendum clause and extend the primary terms of the leases?"

On August 28, 2014, the Court accepted the certified questions. The case is being briefed.