Case law

Haberman v. Zoning Board of Appeals of City of Long Beach

19 N.Y.3d 951 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2012

Balaban v. Rubin

14 N.Y.2d 193 · New York Court of Appeals · May 7, 1964

Cisco v. School Bd. of Borough of Queens ( 161 N. Y. 598 ) and section 3201 was a legislative overruling of the Cisco ruling (see, also, Penal Law, § 514, and Civil Bights Law, §§ 40, 41). … There can be no doubt (since Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U. S. 483 ) that de jure segregation is unconstitutional.

Matter of Daly v. Board of Elections of City of N.Y.

279 N.Y. 743 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 3, 1939

New York State Labor Relations Board v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

295 N.Y. 839 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 1946

Dissenting: Lewis and Conway, JJ., on the ground that, insofar as the order of the New York State Labor Relations Board directs the appellants to bargain collectively with a bargaining agent for a unit of one employee, the

Pugh v. Board of Education Central District No. 1-Fayetteville-Manlius School District

30 N.Y.2d 968 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 6, 1972

People ex rel. Borell v. New York State Board of Parole

18 N.Y.3d 904 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 2012

Matter of Rosenblum v. New York City Conflicts of Interest Board

18 N.Y.3d 830 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 2011

People ex rel. Murray v. New York State Board of Parole

50 N.Y.2d 943 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 24, 1980

On oral argument, relator limited his submission to the contention that in adjudging him in violation of parole the State Board of Parole employed a constitutionally impermissible standard of proof, to wit, a preponderance … In his brief relator also contends, likewise for the first time, that the determination of the Board of Parole was not supported by substantial evidence, a lesser standard of proof than preponderance of the evidence.

People ex rel. New York v. State Board of Tax Commissioners

215 N.Y. 434 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 1915

Co. v. State Board of Tax Commissioners ( 202 N. Y. 426 ) did not lay down any rule which covers this case. … Co. v. State Board of Tax Commissioners ( 209 N. Y. 496, 499 ) and People ex rel. Buffalo & L. E. T. Co. v. State Board of Tax Commissioners ( 209 N. Y. 502, 504 ).

Weinstein v. Planning Board of the Village of Great Neck

21 N.Y.2d 1001 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 1968

Poughkeepsie Professional Firefighters' Ass'n v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

6 N.Y.3d 514 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 2006

After negotiations proved fruitless, the Association concluded that impasse had been reached and petitioned the New York State Public Employment Relations Board (PERB or the Board) for compulsory interest arbitration. … A demand for a review procedure to contest a municipality’s initial determination is, however, mandatorily negotiable (see Matter of City of Watertown v State of N.Y. Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 95 NY2d 73 [2000]).

O'Neill v. Board of Regents of University of State of New York

298 N.Y. 777 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 2, 1948

(See City of New Rochelle v. Closter, 296 N. Y. 506 .) No opinion. LottgheaN, Ch. J., Lewis, CoNWAY, DesmoND, Dye and Ftjld, JJ.

Schenectady Police Benevolent Ass'n v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

85 N.Y.2d 480 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 1995

School Dist. v Public Empl. Relations Bd., 75 NY2d 619, 627 , supra; see also, Matter of Board of Educ., 75 NY2d 660 , 667, 668, supra). … In a similar vein, Matter of Board of Educ. v New York State Pub. Empl.

Le Drugstore Etats Unis, Inc. v. New York State Board of Pharmacy

33 N.Y.2d 298 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 1973

Corp. v. State Liq. Auth,, 26 N Y 2d 375; see, generally, East Meadow Community Concerts Assn. v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. … Assn. v. New York State Thruway Auth., 5 N Y 2d 420, 422, n. 1).

Incorporated Village of Lynbrook v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

48 N.Y.2d 398 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 1979

Moreover, in so concluding, PERB expressly relied upon Board of Educ. v Associated Teachers of Huntington ( 30 NY2d 122, 128 ) and Matter of Weber v Levitt ( 41 AD2d 452 , affd on opn below 34 NY2d 797 , cert den 419 US 997 … Cook v City of Binghamton, 48 NY2d 323 ).

Matter of Larchmont Pancake House v. Board of Assessors

New York Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 2019

- 10 - Matter of Larchmont Pancake House v Board of Assessors, Assessor of the Town of Mamaroneck, and the Board of Assessment Review No. 16 WILSON, J. … First, one must file an administrative complaint with the Town’s Board of Assessment Review (RPTL 706[2], see Matter of Onteora Club v Board of Assessors of the Town of Hunter, 17 AD2d 1008, 1009 [3d Dept 1962], aff’d,

Village of Gloversville v. . Howell

70 N.Y. 287 · New York Court of Appeals · Sep 18, 1877

Y., 504 ; Harris v. The People, 59 id., 599 .) … (Bank of Rome v. Village of Rome, 18 N. Y., 38, 44 ; Bank of Chenango v. Brown, 26 id., 467.)

Pettengill v. . City of Yonkers

116 N.Y. 558 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 1889

(Turner v. City of Newburgh, supra.) We think, however, that the board of water commissioners-was one of the instrumentalities of the government of the city, and that the defendant is liable for its negligent acts. … (Erghott v. Mayor, etc., 96 N. Y. 265 ; Walsh v. Mayor, etc., 107 id. 220; Barnes v. Dist. of Columbia, 91 U. S. 540 ; Brusso v. City of Buffalo, 90 N.

People Ex Rel. Briggs v. . Hanley

226 N.Y. 453 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 1919

(Stephens v. Board of Education, 79 N. Y. 183 ; Tradesman’s Bank v. Merritt, 1 Paige, 302 ; Mechanics Bank v. Levy, 3 id. 606; Pennell v. Deffell, 4 De Gex, M. & G. 372.) … Crim. 158; People v. Dimick, 107 N. Y. 13 , 5 N. Y. Crim. 185.) The money, in fact, belonged not to him, but to Brown & Co. (Rothchild v. Mack, 115 N.

Matter of Weir v. Board of Education, Sch. Dist. No. 10

282 N.Y. 709 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 15, 1940

Order of Appellate Division reversed and claim dismissed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division against the State Industrial Board on the ground that the accident did not arise in the course of the claimant