Case law

City of NY v. STATE DHR

93 N.Y.2d 768 · New York Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 1999

The City, however, wrongly determined that Ricks was not medically qualified. … As a rule, if a statute creates a new substantive right, it is applied prospectively only, unless the Legislature clearly intended to give it retroactive effect.

Matter of Carey v. Morton

297 N.Y. 361 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1948

No other requirement or test is imposed upon a veteran who seeks to qualify for such preference. … This clearly appears from the Federal Veterans’ Preference Act of 1944 (U. S.

Maas v. Cornell University

94 N.Y.2d 87 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 23, 1999

In assessing this employment relationship between the academic institution and its faculty member, we are satisfied that the University’s adherence to its own internal procedures does not qualify for judicial cognizance. … Finally, in this regard, Cornell’s handbook clearly states that it can be altered at any time (impliedly unilaterally), and cautions readers and affected persons to seek out the most updated edition.

People v. Maddaus

17 N.Y.2d 625 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 1966

S. 360 ) did not altogether resolve the question, as appears rather clearly from People v. Laverne (14 N Y 2d 304). … The meaning is, that every citizen shall hold his life, liberty, property, and immunities, under the protection of the general rules which govern society.”

People v. . Ferola

215 N.Y. 285 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 1915

Y. 53 .) “ It has. long been established that the admissibility of evidence is not affected by the illegality of the means through which the party has *261 been enabled to obtain the evidence. … After stating that the evidence was not objectionable on the ground of the violation of the statute or because any immunity or privilege of the accused was vio^ lated, he said: “ This leaves no other foundation for the rule

People v. Beckwith

7 N.Y. Crim. 146 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 1889

Undoubtedly previous threats may qualify and give a character to the circumstances which surrounded the killing. But in this case we do not know the circumstances. … It is only where there is direct proof of one that the other can be established by circumstantial evidence.

Williams v. Williams

23 N.Y.2d 592 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 1969

The last major amendment to the statute —the one most clearly circumvented by the decision now being made — extended the privilege previously granted to newspapers (more precisely, to" their reporters, editors or publishers … the statute was not intended to allow “ 1 any person ’ to maliciously institute a judicial proceeding” (opn., p. 599) or “to permit persons to institute false and malicious actions ” (concurring opn.. p. 605) persuasively establish

Stonehill Capital Management LLC v. Bank of the West

28 N.Y.3d 439 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 2016

Breach of Contract Claim To establish a prima facie breach of contract, Stonehill must show that BOTW breached a binding agreement between the parties, which damaged Stonehill (see Palmetto Partners, L.P. v AJW Qualified … We disagree with BOTW that the “subject to” language in the April 27th email clearly expresses an intent not to be bound to the sale of the Goett Loan.

People v. . Risley

214 N.Y. 75 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 1915

This clearly is not essential in order to enable the plaintiff to form his complaint; he can state upon information and belief any number that he desires and on the trial he may subpoena the defendant to produce its books … It would not be allowed, for illustration, if the fact to be established were whether A had in fact died, to prove by the Carlisle table he should still be alive.

Wakeman v. . Dalley

51 N.Y. 27 · New York Court of Appeals · May 5, 1872

imported knowledge of the facts on the part of the person making them, and they were not materially qualified by a reference to any person as the source of information." … But Judge HUNT, writing the opinion of the court, says of the decision in that case, that it "destroys the distinction between fraud and negligence, which I suppose to be well established, and I am not prepared to reiterate

Clement v. . Cash

21 N.Y. 253 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 5, 1860

Where the sum fixed is greatly disproportionate to the presumed actual damage, probably a court of equity may relieve; but a court of law has no right to erroneously construe the intention of parties, when clearly expressed … If it were conceded, however, that the doctrine of the cases referred to is to be considered as the established law of this State, it cannot be applied to the present cases.

Brown v. . Knapp

79 N.Y. 136 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 2, 1879

Brown to pay this interest cannot be doubted, and the plaintiff, therefore, established against him a meritorious cause of action. … Clearly the law of this State, as no other guide or rule was furnished. (Savage v. O'Neil, 44 N. Y., 298 .)

Interborough Rapid Transit Co. v. Lavin

247 N.Y. 65 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 10, 1928

Here we have a clearly expressed contractual obligation between the brotherhood and each of its members. … Business and property rights in their broadest sense *83 should be immune from malicious interference. They rest upon established principles of law; they* are subject to attack within limits fixed by law.

People v. Correa

15 N.Y.3d 213 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 3, 2010

For example, in preserving the State’s historical sovereign immunity from suit, Supreme Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over claims for money damages brought against the State, which must be *228 initiated and tried in … Addressing the precise issue raised in these appeals—whether Supreme Court may try an unindicted misdemeanor—there is authority for the proposition that it does and that any effort by the Legislature to “abridge, limit or qualify

People v. . Hawker

152 N.Y. 234 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 1897

Section 140 of the act relates to the qualifications of persons who shall be permitted to practice medicine, and prohibits all persons not so qualified from engaging in such practice, including those who have ever been convicted … :'been convicted of a felony. ” The word “ ever ” to our minds clearly indicates the legislative intention to prohibit the practice of medicine on the part of any person who has been convicted of a felony either before or

Miles v. . Loomis

75 N.Y. 288 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 1878

It need not be held, ivhere it clearly appears either by the avowal of the party offering them or otherwise, that instruments are put in solely for the purpose of being submitted to the jury or referee for comparison with … somewhat more liberal rule as to evidence of handwriting than had previously prevailed in this State, yet it has been generally acquiesced in, is in conformity with tile law in other States, and seems to have become an established

Crawford v. Nilan

289 N.Y. 444 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 1943

The reception of that statement was clearly error and in a case so close upon the facts we cannot say that' it may not have been the determining factor with the jury in arriving at its substantial verdict. … The rule was there stated succinctly as follows: “ Where parol proof has been offered against the testimony of a witness under oath, in order to impeach his veracity, establishing that he has given a different account at

Bliven v. . Seymour

88 N.Y. 469 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 1882

A failure to use appropriate technical language, or a misapplication of legal terms, will not defeat an intention clearly manifested and sufficiently disclosed by an examination of the will itself. … The gift to Amelia’s children is qualified by the limitation over in case of their death, and is to be treated as a single bequest to such children, with its character and extent defined.

In Re Proving the Will of Bergdorf

206 N.Y. 309 · New York Court of Appeals · Oct 15, 1912

In order to establish its right to the letters testamentary, the Guaranty Trust Company must seek and find in the will a designation of itself as an executor. … This phase of the question was clearly and thoroughly discussed in Hartnett v.

People v. Robinson

89 N.Y.2d 648 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 27, 1997

The Monroe County Court Judge determined that although defendant had made a good-faith effort to secure the witness, defendant had failed to establish that the subject Grand Jury testimony was sufficiently reliable to qualify … As was the case in Ohio v Roberts ( 448 US 56 , supra), the prosecutor’s *657 "questioning clearly partook of cross-examination as a matter of form” {id., at 70 [emphasis in original]). 3 We note that it is only necessary