The New York State Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility, at Cannon 7, states that: "A Lawyer Should Represent a Client Zealously Within the Bounds of the Law".  Dibble & Miller, P.C. prides itself on rigid adherence to this and all ethical precepts.

The following samples of past cases are not intended to be comprehensive, but rather merely interesting and, in some cases, illustrative of our devotion to our clients. Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcome.

Summary of Selected Interesting Cases

1. Dibble & Miller, P.C., Digital Law Office:  The Firm Was Featured for Its Advanced Law-Office Technology in the Rochester Daily Record, a Prominent Legal and Business Publication.

A quote from the paper:

"The firm's entire case management system is digital. This may come as a surprise to many in the legal community but Dibble & Miller does not keep paper files when they do work for their clients. The firm, which practices in the areas of business agreements, business formations, criminal law, debtor rights, estate planning, family law, litigation, personal injury, real estate, and tax defense, is a model for law firms of the future ."

The article continues to describe the firm's cutting-edge technology and the benefits to clients as a result of the firm having such technology. The firm's use of advanced document management technology is reflected on the Xerox Web Site.

2. Contempt of Court: Sued a Family Court Judge for Improperly Incarcerating an Attorney.
   
   An attorney was involved in a family law court matter and was accused by the presiding judge of violating an order not to drink alcohol or take drugs. The judge was told during the court proceeding that the attorney had drunk alcohol and had taken cocaine before the court proceeding and the judge acted upon this and incarcerated the attorney for 30 days without giving the attorney the right to even make a statement. Mr. Dibble sued and the attorney was released.
3. Trust Funds: Sued a Bank for Abuse of Discretion for Failing to Pay the Medical Bills of the Beneficiary of a Trust Set Up for That Purpose.
   
   The beneficiary was elderly and the trust was set up by her deceased husband to pay, amongst other bills, medical bills. The beneficiary paid medical bills out of her own personal funds and later requested that she be reimbursed by the bank as trustee. The bank refused to pay because the medical bills had been paid and because the request was not made during the year the bills were incurred. The beneficiary had never previously been told that the bank would not reimburse paid medical bills or that the request had to be made during the year the bills were incurred.  Mr. Dibble sued and the beneficiary was paid.
4. Election Law: Sued the Monroe County Board of Elections on Behalf of Republican Party Member-Candidates for Failing to Validate Certain Designating Petitions Merely Because the Subscribing Witness Moved from One Apartment to Another in the Same Political Subdivision.
   
   This was a significant victory for the candidates, and for the electorate at large, because unnecessarily strict construction of the Election Laws by the Board of Elections prevented the candidates from running in the primary elections against party members selected by the incumbent Republican party. Voters were being denied the right to choose their candidates in a free and fair election.
   
   The suit was lost at the trial level, but Mr. Dibble won a unanimous reversal on appeal. The Appellate Court held that if "there is no implication of fraud, resort to strict construction should be avoided if it would lead to injustice in the electoral process or the public perception of it". As a result, our clients, the Republican candidates, were permitted to run in the primary elections. They were ecstatic!
   
   This was the fastest appeal completed by the law firm. Normally, appeals take many months to complete (often six (6) to nine (9) months, and sometimes longer).
   
   The trial judge rendered his decision on August 13, 2001, and the Appellate Court rendered its decision just ten (10) days later, on August  23, 2001. The Board of Election's Motion for Leave to Appeal to the NY Court of Appeals was argued and denied just six (6) days later on August 29, 2001 (which means that the Appellate Court decision stands as the law of this case).
5. Real Estate--Fence Affidavit Law: Sued a New Neighbor of a Client to Stop the Neighbor from Taking Property that the Neighbor Thought She Had Purchased but that Our Client Had Been Using for More than 10 Years Before the Purchase.
   
   Our client had owned his property for 15 years, when a new neighbor purchased adjacent property and tried to claim property that they thought they had purchased but that our client had been using for 15 years.
   
   At the time that the new neighbor purchased the adjacent property, our client signed a "fence affidavit" purporting to assert no ownership to a strip of land in question. However, the firm sued and obtained ownership for our client, by adverse possession, to the strip of land in question, because the "fence affidavit" had been signed after our client had been using the property adverse to the rights of the then owner for more than 10 years.
   
   Basically, when real estate is used "adversely" (as defined by the law) for more than 10 years by someone else, the owner loses ownership of the property.
   
   The firm won at trial. The defendant appealed, and on appeal the firm won again, which resulted in an Appellate decision that substantially changed real estate practice in New York State, by strictly guarding the rights of property owners, where an owner of property learns that a neighbor claims, or may claim, a portion of his or her land that the owner had been using for more than 10 years.  Now, in these adverse possession situations, a quit claim deed or agreement with "consideration" is required, where a "fence affidavit" (which merely states that there is no claim being made to the land in question) was accepted before.

   The case was so important that a summary of it appeared in the local legal and business publication known as The Daily Record.

6. Funeral Arrangements: Protected Grandson's Rights to Decide Funeral Arrangements.

When a grandson lost his beloved grandmother, not only did he have to cope with the grief of her passing, but also the legal feud that ensued with another relative over the right of burial. This other relative had taken control of the grandmother’s body, at an undisclosed location, and arranged for decedent's burial without even consulting the grandson. This relative refused to compromise.  The comprehension of one of the attorney's at the firm of the detailed law in this field allowed the firm to secure a court order granting the grandson the right to bury his grandmother with the respect she deserved.

7. Non-Compete Agreements: Claim by an Employer of Possible "Inevitable Disclosure" Not Permitted As Substitute for a Non-Compete Agreement.

   Mr. Norton has authored articles for “The Daily Record”, a well known and widely used local legal publication, including " ‘Inevitable Disclosure’ Not Permitted As Substitute for Non-Compete Agreement ". In this article Mr. Norton explained a complex and heavily litigated matter concerning an employer’s ability, using the theory of inevitable disclosure of possible trade secrets, to restrict a former employee’s decision to work for a competitor following the employee’s termination, where the employee was not restricted by a non-compete agreement.

8. Power of Attorney Abuse: Unmasked Double Agent and Recovered Daughter's Inheritance; Deceased Mother's Life Savings.

After the death of her 92 year old mother and best friend, our client was shocked to learn that her mother's life savings had been cleaned out by greedy neighbors who had been "assisting" the deceased with a power of attorney. An attorney at the firm worked through the night preparing legal papers for a court order freezing funds summoning the neighbors to face a New York State Supreme Court Justice. The neighbors surrendered all of the money they improperly obtained after firm threatened further legal action revealing that their self-dealing with decedent's power of attorney was illegal and that the purported change in beneficiary of a bank account was ineffective under the laws applying to banks.  The firm also recovered additional money to defray the cost of our client's legal fees.

9. Pistol Permits: Persuaded Court to Reinstate Client's Pistol Permit after NYS Felony Conviction.

After a conviction for felony driving while intoxicated, our client's pistol permit was lifted and his gun collection was seized. An attorney at the firm persuaded a Court to reinstate our client's pistol permit based upon a certificate of relief from civil disabilities and an analysis of New York State and federal law governing gun possession..
 

Attorney Advertising

Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcome