Case Results

Misappropriation of Lost Property New York Retention Case

New York treats the misappropriation of lost property as a criminal offense when a person knowingly takes possession of property that belongs to another and fails to make reasonable efforts to return it. This case study examines a matter in which a subway passenger picked up a lost mobile phone, failed to turn it in, and later faced criminal investigation. The analysis reflects New York Penal Law standards, relevant prosecutorial considerations, and defense strategies commonly applied in cases involving misappropriation of lost property. Although these cases often begin with a misunderstanding about legal duties after finding lost items, they can escalate quickly when the owner reports significant personal or professional harm. This study outlines how the defense team examined factual, legal, and evidentiary issues while working toward a non criminal resolution.

Privacy Lawsuit — Dismissed a Workplace Surveillance Case

Facing a Privacy Lawsuit in New York can be overwhelming for business owners especially when a dispute stems not from misconduct, but from necessary workplace safety measures.In this NYC case study, a farm-technology business owner was accused of violating employee privacy after installing a video-only camera system inside a sensitive control room.Although the client’s purpose was to protect equipment and prevent operational failures, several employees filed complaints alleging unauthorized monitoring. Their claims triggered a workplace-privacy investigation and raised the threat of a civil Privacy Lawsuit based on intrusion-upon-seclusion theories.With strategic legal analysis, digital-evidence review, and arguments under NY Labor Law §203-c, the defense attorney successfully demonstrated that the surveillance was lawful. Investigators closed the matter with no civil liability, no criminal referral, and no Privacy Lawsuit exposure.

Unfair Competition Defense Against Brand Confusion Claim

In Washington D.C., disputes involving unfair competition commonly arise when a business rebrands or introduces a new trade name in a market shared with established competitors. This case study examines how a business owner who adopted a new brand name after a comprehensive redesign faced a damages claim alleging consumer confusion and unfair competition. The defense team successfully demonstrated that the rebranding effort was legitimate, non imitative, and compliant with District unfair competition principles rooted in federal trademark doctrines, the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act, and general common law misappropriation standards. Through a fact driven legal strategy, the defendant ultimately secured a complete dismissal of the claim.

DUI Property Damage New York Non Charging Decision

This case involves a New York driver who faced significant legal exposure after a DUI property damage incident that resulted in police investigation and potential criminal charges. Although New York law imposes strict penalties for impaired driving and for causing property damage while intoxicated, strategic legal intervention can influence how the case is evaluated, especially when key evidentiary and procedural issues arise. This case study demonstrates how attorney guidance helped the client secure a non charging outcome despite involvement in a DUI property damage event. It further illustrates how New York Vehicle and Traffic Law handles blood alcohol testing, investigative procedures, and mitigating circumstances relevant to impaired driving allegations.