Specializing in difficult cases and troubled matters, the law firm of Ray, Mitev & Associates is nationally known for tough litigation. From routine matters to landmark cases, we take the same approach in every case we handle: meticulous attention to detail, proper preparation and innovative, custom-tailored legal solutions to our clients’ problems. We are not simply attorneys. We are architects at law, sculpting legal precedent as we help our clients navigate an ever-changing legal environment. We continually push the envelope and are never satisfied until you are. Read more …
Our firm has set precedent dozens of times, in State and Federal Court. Below are some of our published and notable decisions, as they have appeared in the paper of record, The New York Law Journal, broken down by practice area.
CRIMINAL PRACTICE/CIVIL RIGHTS
Woe v. Spitzer
Set precedent in Federal case involving the SORA laws and a sex offender’s due process right to be de-classified from registration, even as a Level 1 offender.
People v. McElroy
Obtained reduction of SORA level arguing that Internet photographs were not contemplated as physical victims in Risk Assessment Instrument
People v. Syska
Criminal Charges dismissed pre-trial after arguing that there was no obstruction of a police investigation by a woman who asked police if they had a warrant to enter her home.
Boyle v. County of Suffolk
Set precedent in a Federal civil forfeiture case involving Suffolk County’s seizure and retaining of automobiles of drivers who were only charged (but not convicted) of driving drunk, with the Court holding that the established forfeiture laws were being ignored in Suffolk County.
People v. Hahlbohm
Matovcik v. Times Beacon Newspapers
Spielman v. Carrino
PERSONAL INJURY/WRONGFUL DEATH
Malone v. County of Suffolk
Set precedent arguing that doctors who prescribe and overprescribe narcotics to known and habitual drug users could be liable to third parties for the injuries caused to them by said drug users, in a case arising out of the tragic Medford pharmacy Father’s Day 2011 massacre.
Stuve v. Baingan
The so-called “emergency doctrine” which drivers rely on to escape liability in automobile accidents does not apply to every case, the Court held, after it reversed itself on our motion to re-argue a grant of summary judgment against the driver that we alleged rear-ended our client.
MATRIMONIAL / FAMILY LAW
Schulz v. Schulz
Successfully defended against a relocation application at trial; the case stands for the proposition that a parent who relocates out of state without the other parent’s consent cannot thereafter use the relocation (and establishing of new home, new job and new school for the children) as factors to support their relocation.
In re Gregory Tarone
Set precedent in the Federal Bankruptcy Court, arising out of a case where the firm obtained summary judgment against a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding stemming out of a matrimonial action.
WILLS, TRUSTS & ESTATES LITIGATION
Estate of Eriksen
Successfully vacated a Court’s decree awarding a multi-million dollar wrongful death payout by Suffolk County to the father of a man who died while in police custody; the firm established that the deceased had left behind a daughter, who is by law entitled to the entire sum.
O’Keefe v. Blue Gold Fleet
Marino v. Shoreham-Wading River School District http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/CaseDecisionNY.jsp?id=1202500417856