Articles by Lessing E. Gold

In a case recently decided by the Supreme Court of New York, the issue was raised as to whether the plaintiff’s action was barred by the statute of limitations.

The plaintiff alleged that for years the defendants have known of the dangers posed by the design of these ionization smoke alarms: they fail to adequately detect and, thus, to alert people to smoldering fires in their homes.

An interesting case arose in Illinois regarding an insurance policy issued by the plaintiff insurance company for a fire loss.

In a case recently decided in the State of Illinois, the plaintiff filed a complaint alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

A recent case in Arizona dealt with the issue of whether an arbitration provision in an employment agreement can be enforced.

In a recent case decided by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, the plaintiff alarm company filed an action against one of its dealers and its owner.

In a case recently decided by the Court of Appeals in Colorado, the plaintiff and a casualty insurer appealed the judgment entered after a jury trial to determine damages under breach of contract claims against the defendant alarm company.

A question frequently arises as to whether an employee of a security company can obtain a permit for a handgun.

A very interesting case involving a medical alert monitoring system was recently decided by the Appellate Court of Connecticut.