Joel H. Rosner is a counsel in the Litigation and Reputation Management practice. He regularly represents clients in commercial, intellectual property and defamation litigation in the state and federal courts and in arbitrations. With a strong understanding of his clients’ business needs, he assists in complex litigation matters concerning trademark, copyright and patent rights, contract disputes, fraud
Prior to joining Tarter Krinsky & Drogin LLP, Joel was an associate at Kornstein Veisz Wexler & Pollard LLP and an Assistant Corporation Counsel with the New York City Law Department.
What I do when I'm not practicing law:
Tarter Krinsky & Drogin was featured in the Law360 article, "Clothier Owes Atty Fees For 'Stunning' Negligence In TM Case." Tarter Krinsky & Drogin client Hybrid Promotions LLC prevailed on a sanctions motion based on the discovery misconduct of its adversary and its adversary's counsel.
Leading mid-size, full-service law firm Tarter Krinsky & Drogin is pleased to announce the promotions of two associates to counsel, Michael Camporeale in the Real Estate and Construction practices and Joel Rosner in the Litigation practice.
On March 31, 2021, Litigation Counsel Joel Rosner will present the Stafford Live CLE Webinar, “Defending SLAPP Suits: Widening Circuit Split, Anti-SLAPP Motions, Cease and Desist Letters, Amended State Laws.”
On December 12, Intellectual Property co-chair Amy Goldsmith and Litigation counsel Joel Rosner will present a Lawline CLE webcast, “Knockoffs and Takedowns: Protecting IP Rights on Social Media.”
During this program, Amy and Joel will explore how to determine what IP rights exist with respect to an infringed product, how to remove knockoff products from social media platforms and how to take other legal measures to stop the infringement.
In a striking decision issued on July 15, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that motions to dismiss based on state Anti-SLAPP statutes, which require that plaintiffs satisfy a high standard of proof in certain types of defamation cases, cannot be made in federal court because such motions conflict with Rules 12 and 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (covering New York, Connecticut and Vermont) has issued an opinion that enhances the effectiveness of arbitration as an alternative to litigation. This ruling makes it easier to use the federal courts to enforce subpoenas issued by arbitration panels.