Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.06s
Page Airways, Inc. v. Town Board
8 N.Y.2d 980 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 8, 1960
Cited 0 timesPublishedBissell v. . Sackett Wall Board Company
188 N.Y. 613 · New York Court of Appeals · May 7, 1907
Cited 0 timesPublishedFaulisi v. Board of Police Commissioners
1 N.Y.2d 918 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 11, 1956
Cited 0 timesPublishedWood v. Board Sup'rs Monroe Co.
37 N.Y. St. Rep. 964 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 1891
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Haight, J., in Crowninshield v. Board of Sup’rs Cayuga Co. 37 N. Y. State Rep 96. All concur. Affirming 30 N. Y. State Rep. 706.
Cited 0 timesPublishedClaim of Drew v. Board of Education
29 N.Y.2d 510 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 9, 1971
Cited 1 timesPublishedTorok Trust v. Town Board of Alexandria
25 N.Y.3d 1098 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 2015
Cited 0 timesPublishedThe People v. William Brown / The People v. Patrick Thomas
25 N.Y.3d 973 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 26, 2015
The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, determined that Supreme Court should have suppressed the showup identification of defendant William Brown ( 115 AD3d 38 [1st Dept 2014]) and the showup identification … While acknowledging that “determinations as to reasonable suspicion typically present a mixed question of law and fact,” the dissent cites People v McRay ( 51 NY2d 594 [1980]) for the proposition that these cases instead
Cited 5 timesPublishedBrown Bros. Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Beam Construction Corp.
41 N.Y. 397 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 1977
In accordance with long-established principles, the existence of a binding contract is not dependent on the subjective intent of either Brown or Cale (Mencher v Weiss, 306 NY 1, 7 ; Hotchkiss v National City Bank of N. … Jemzura v Jemzura, 36 NY2d 496, 503-504 ).
Cited 4 timesPublishedMatter of Poucher v. Teachers' R. Board
249 N.Y. 414 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 1928
K) is not effective until delivered, and such delivery does not result from a mere deposit in the mails (Crown Point Iron Co. v. Ætna Insurance Co., 127 N. Y. 608 ; Peabody v. Satterlee, 166 N. Y. 174 ).
Cited 4 timesPublishedMatter of Gramlich v. Board of Education
297 N.Y. 349 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1948
We granted the Board of Education leave to appeal to this court. In Matter of Leahy v. City of New York ( 285 N. … Ward & Gow v. Krinsky, 259 U. S. 503 ), and Matter of Europe v. Addison Amusements, Inc. ( 231 N.
Cited 5 timesPublishedBoard of Supervisors v. Sherlo Realty, Inc.
13 N.Y.2d 1172 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 1964
Cited 1 timesPublishedBikman v. New York City Loft Board
14 N.Y.3d 377 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 1, 2010
Subsequently, in 2001, Broadway applied to the Loft Board for an abandonment order pursuant to 29 RCNY 2-10 (f). … Supreme Court annulled the Loft Board’s determination ( 2007 NY Slip Op 30541[U] ), holding that the proceeding was governed by Matter of Moskowitz v Jorden ( 27 AD3d 305 [1st Dept 2006], lv dismissed 7 NY3d 783 [2006]),
Cited 3 timesPublishedBoard of Education of Union Free School District No. 3 v. Board of Education
294 N.Y. 676 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 1, 1945
Cited 0 timesPublishedBoard of Commissioners of Pilots v. Vanderbilt
31 N.Y. 265 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 1864
The board of commissioners have never given the notice required by the act. … It affirmatively appears, not only that there was no written resolution *270 or order of the board directing the notice, and no record of their proceedings, but that, while the board verbally ordered a notice to be given
Cited 6 timesPublishedMetropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade v. Bloomberg
20 N.Y.3d 1075 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 2013
Cited 0 timesPublishedCostello v. New York State Board of Parole
23 N.Y.3d 1002 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 26, 2014
The Executive Law requires the Board of Parole (the Board) to consider any victim impact statement in the decision to grant or deny parole release to an inmate (see Executive Law § 259-i [2] [c] [A]). … On the contrary, we hope that our decision will impel both parole boards and district attorneys to comply fully with the letter and spirit of Executive Law § 259-i (2) (c) (A) (v) and CPL 440.50 (1), so that the effect of
Cited 11 timesPublishedKasckarow v. Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders
22 N.Y.3d 968 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 2013
Cited 0 timesPublishedNo opinion textA. D. Granger Co. v. Brown-Ketcham Iron Works
204 N.Y. 218 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 1912
In the case of Weeks v. O'Brien ( 141 N.
Cited 5 timesPublishedHague Corp. v. Empire Zone Designation Board
19 N.Y.3d 1016 · New York Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 2012
Cited 0 timesPublishedBrown v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company
289 N.Y. 821 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 1943
Judgments reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event, on the authority of Cooke v. Drigant, impleaded with John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company [ 289 N.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna