FREIREICH L.L.C.

Notable Matters

• In Wulach v. Busell & Stier, an arbitrator awarded $1.05 million in damages, plus legal fees and costs, in a legal malpractice suit over estate planning advice.
• In a case of first impression in New Jersey, Jay pioneered the recovery of interest damages against a tax advisor in a professional malpractice action under New Jersey law. In Ronson v. Talesnick, Jay successfully argued that under New Jersey law, clients are not barred from recovering interest owed to the Internal Revenue Service as damages in a malpractice action. This ruling was made under the principle that the harmed plaintiff should be permitted to recover damages from the wrongdoing of the tortfeasor, although the client's recovery should be reduced by any benefits received from the wrongdoers' action.
• In the case of Friedman v. Commission, Jay was able to successfully overturn most of the decision of the Tax Court, which had denied the taxpayer innocent spouse relief. The Circuit Court ruled that the Taxpayer's subjective beliefs needed to be reconsidered by the Tax Court. Eventually, the taxpayer obtained full relief when she was able to take advantage of the retroactive relief in Section 6015.
• Jay represented a taxpayer in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and before the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Cockrell v. Commissioner. Though unsuccessful in overturning the Tax Court decision against her, claiming innocent spouse relief, Jay continued to represent her in her pursuit to have the laws changed. The efforts of Ms. Cockrell, with Jay's assistance, in the U.S. Congress led in 1998 to retroactive Congressional relief to her and to all others similarly situated. This new Congressional Act in 1998 was codified in Section 6015 of the Internal Revenue Code. The act was co-sponsored by Senator Alphone D'Amato and Senator William Roth.
• Jay won a reversal on appeal before the Superior Court Appellate Division in a case involving whether a New Jersey court can pierce a Florida discretionary trust to pay child support owing to a beneficiary of the trust. On August 4, 2009, the Appellate Division agreed with Jay and overturned the lower court decision and held that the trust could not be pierced.
• Lerman v. Lerman, 2009 WL 2365973 (App. Div. N.J. 2009)
• In re Estate of Stancheck, 2008 WL 706919 (App. Div. 2008)
• Etonic Worldwide, LLC v. Kinetic Sports, Inc., 2005 WL 3527249 (D.N.J. 2005)
• Sunik v. C.I.R. 321 F. 3d 335 (2d Cir. 2003)
• DeGuzman v. U.S., 147 F. Supp. 2d 274 (D.N.J. 2001)
• Sunik v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 2001-195 (U.S. Tax Ct. 2001)
• Ronson v. Talesnick, 33 F. Supp. 2d 347 (D.N.J. 1999)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., 159 F. 3d 1346 (2d. Cir. 1998)
• Cockrell v. C.I.R., 116 F. 3d 1472 (2d Cir. 1997)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 1996-327 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1996)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., 53 F. 3d 523 (2d Cir. 1995)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 1995-576 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1995)
• Cummin v. U.S., 1994 WL 669148 (D.N.J. 1994)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 1993-549 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1993)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 1992-89 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1992)
• Estate of Swensen v. Dir., Div. Tax, 12 N.J. Tax 558 (N.J. Tax 1992)
• Friedman v. C.I.R., 97 T.C. 606 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1991)
• English v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 1990-662 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1990)
• Cannon v. C.I.R., T.C. Memo 1990-410 (U.S. Tax Ct. 1990)
• Rosenthal v. Klein, 1989 WL 84300 (E.D. Pa. 1989)