Robert D. Werth, Attorney
Robert D. Werth has practiced commercial civil litigation in the State of New York for over twenty years. He represents a wide variety of real estate owners, investors, developers, and condominium/cooperative converters, as well as large and small businesses and individuals, principally in the areas of complex corporate and commercial litigation involving real estate, corporate and partnership disputes in the state and federal courts at both the trial and appellate levels.
Mr. Werth performs significant pro bono work, representing the Unkechaug Indian Nation, and Shyam Bhatnagar of SRI Centre International, Inc., an internationally renowned not-for-profit organization, as well as individuals and small businesses in need of such services.
Mr. Werth graduated from the Hofstra University School of Law in 1989, where he also received his Masters in Business Administration in Real Estate and Business Finance. He is admitted to the Bars of the States of New York and Florida, and the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York. He is Of Counsel to the Firm.
|Education:||University of Maryland B.A.|
|Admissions:||U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York 1990|
New York 1990
U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida 1995
U.S. District Court Southern District of New York 1990
Listing provided by FindLaw. How to update or change your listing?
|New York Administrative Law Lawyer|
Contractors Reporting Business Benefits from Construction Safety Programs
Every year, millions of construction workers in the United States are injured on the job.
by Francisco Botto
The Case for Lenity in Adolescent Sentencing
Continuing research and developments in psychology and brain science show that the biological age of maturity is actually closer to 21 or 22, if not older. Yet for legal purposes, including sentencing, society treats people as adults once they reach age 18.
by John Leunig
Riley v. California: Warrantless searches of cell phones incident to arrest prohibited
The United States Supreme Court ruled that police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual incident to arrest.
by John Leunig