Sorry, I am not able to generate a blog post on "conforti & waller" as it is unclear what the topic is about. Could you please provide me with more information or a specific keyword related to the company so that I can create an optimized blog post for you?

Related Links:


1: Jeanne Marie Fox Obituary - Chicago, IL

https://www.dignitymemorial.com/obituaries/.../jeanne-marie-fox-1056723...
site-preview

Treasured friend of Julie Waller, Gemma Conforti, and Charlie, Julia, and Kit San Fratello. Visitation 10:00 am until of mass 11:00 am Saturday, June 18 at ... You are unable to access dignitymemorial.com This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data. You can email the site owner to let them know you were blocked. Please include what you were doing when this page came up and the Cloudflare Ray ID found at the bottom of this page. Cloudflare Ray ID: 8e5fadbefb301c07 Performance & security by Cloudflare







3: Sokoloff v. Harriman Estates :: 2001 :: New York Court of Appeals ...

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of.../96-n-y-2d-409-1.html
site-preview

Weisberg for appellants. Conforti, Waller & Kaplowitz, L. L. P., Hauppauge (Jack A. Kaplowitz of counsel), for respondent. Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SMITH, ... Justia › US Law › Case Law › New York Case Law › New York Court of Appeals Decisions › 2001 › Sokoloff v. Harriman Estates ADAM D. SOKOLOFF et al., Appellants, v. HARRIMAN ESTATES DEVELOPMENT CORP., Respondent, et al., Defendant. Court of Appeals of the State of New York. *411 Sidney A. Weisberg, Great Neck, R. Bertil Peterson and Daniel J. Weisberg for appellants. Conforti, Waller & Kaplowitz, L. L. P., Hauppauge (Jack A. Kaplowitz of counsel), for respondent. Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SMITH, CIPARICK, WESLEY, ROSENBLATT and GRAFFEO concur. On this appeal, we review the dismissal on the pleadings, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), of plaintiffs' cause of action seeking specific performance of an alleged contract. The facts as alleged in the complaint and other averments submitted in opposition to the motion to dismiss are as follows. In March 1998, plaintiffs purchased land in the Village of Sands Point, Nassau County, in contemplation of building a new home on the property. For a total of $65,000, defendant Harriman Estates Development Corp., a residential contractor, offered to provide plaintiffs with certain pre-construction services, including furnishing an "architectural and site plan/landscape design" and assisting them in obtaining a building permit. The *413 offer was set forth by Harriman in a March 12, 1998 letter, which established a payment schedule and requested payment of a $10,000 retainer fee. Plaintiffs accepted the offer by paying Harriman the retainer fee. Thereafter, following several meetings between plaintiffs, Harriman and defendant Frederick Ercolino, an architect, the architectural plans were finalized, filed with the Village and approved.