Case law

Schieffelin v. . Hylan

236 N.Y. 254 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 1923

In Kingman v. … In Stegmaier v.

Meyer v. Whisnant

307 N.Y. 369 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 14, 1954

Such violations as Whisnant may have been guilty of were no proof of negligent causation by him, since there was no possible logical connection between any of them, and the accident (see Brown v. Shyne, 242 N. … Y. 176, 180 ; Tedla v. Ellman, 280 N. Y. 124 ; Hagadorn v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 298 N. Y. 882 ; Goldblatt v. Tabacco, 299 N. Y. 663 ; Restatement, Torts, § 286). The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

O'MARA v. Town of Wappinger

9 N.Y.3d 303 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 2007

The Planning Board tentatively approved a preliminary layout of the project and conditioned approval, in part, on the creation of a permanent open space on a preliminary plat. 1 At a January 23, 1963 meeting, the Board approved … “imposed by the Planning Board through its zoning powers” (id. at 697 n 6).

Scarborough Properties Corp. v. Village of Briarcliff Manor

278 N.Y. 370 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 7, 1938

(Flack v. Village of Green Island, 122 N. Y. 107, at p. 113 .) The conveyance of land to a village upon the agreement of the village to pay for it constitutes a sale of land, not a gift. … (Rees v. City of Chicago, 38 Ill. 322 . Cf. H. W. Chaplin, " The Law of Dedication in its Relation to Trust Legislation,” 16 Harvard Law Review, 329, at p. 335.)

Matter of Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Boland

281 N.Y. 357 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 14, 1939

, to restrain the appointee from conducting the hearing and the Board from conducting the hearing before any person other than a member of the Board or a person appointed by the Board from an eligible list promulgated by … The Legislature had the power to classify, within constitutional limitations, as it desired (Matter of Andreson v. Rice, 277 N. Y. 271, 276 ).

Ulster County Savings Institution v. Young

161 N.Y. 23 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 1899

Banking Assn. v. Conkling, 90 N. Y. 116, 121 ; Smith v. Molleson, 148 N. Y. 241 .) … The following cases are to the same effect: Cruikshank v. Cruikshank ( 9 How. Pr. 350, 351 ); King v. Todd (27 Abb. [N. C.] 149); Robert v. Ditmas ( 7 Wend. 523 ); Gansevoort v. Nelson ( 6 Hill, 392 ); Niles v.

Lamb v. Meisser

13 N.Y.2d 874 · New York Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 1963

Stoll v. New York State College of Veterinary Medicine at Cornell University

94 N.Y.2d 162 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 23, 1999

SUNY is an agency under FOIL (see, Matter of Citizens for Alternatives to Animal Labs v Board of Trustees, 92 NY2d 357, 360 ; see also, Matter of Russo v Nassau County Community Coll., 81 NY2d 690, 698 ). … Board of Trustees, supra, 92 NY2d, at 361 , quoting Matter of Capital Newspapers v Whalen, 69 NY2d 246, 253 ).

People v. Kling

14 N.Y.2d 571 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 1964

Order affirmed (People v. Tomaselli, 7 N Y 2d 350; People v. Brown, 7 N Y 2d 359). No opinion. Concur: Judges Dye, Van Voorhis, Burke and Scileppi. … Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld and Bergan dissent and vote to reverse and order a hearing (see People v. Hairston, 10 N Y 2d 92; People v. Adams, 12 N Y 2d 417).

Hudacs v. Frito-Lay, Inc.

90 N.Y.2d 342 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 1997

Law § 193 (Matter of Hudacs v Frito-Lay, Inc., 160 Misc 2d 131, 135 ). … Co. v Massachusetts, 471 US 724, 755 ).

Shaw v. McGinnis

14 N.Y.2d 864 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 1964

Order reversed and proceeding remitted to Special Term to conduct a hearing on the issues presented (Matter of Brown v. McGinnis, 10 N Y 2d 531).

Parr v. President & Trustees of the Greenbush

72 N.Y. 463 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 12, 1878

A simple resolution of the board, accepting the proposition of the other party, could make a contract, or a resolution of the board specifying the terms of the contract assented to by the other party could make a contract … (Brady v. City of New York, 20 N. Y., 312 ; McDonald v. The Mayor, 68 id., 23.)

Cummings v. Regan

36 N.Y.2d 969 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 17, 1975

If, after appearance before the board pursuant to subdivision four of this section, the prisoner is denied release on parole, the board shall inform such prisoner, in writing and within two weeks of such appearance, of the … In Matter of Cummings (Thomas) v Regan: Order reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein.

Claim of Nashko v. Standard Water Proofing Co.

4 N.Y.2d 199 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 3, 1958

If sufficient significant contacts with this State""1 appear so that it can reasonably be said that the employment ; is located here, then the Workmen’s Compensation Board hasJ jurisdiction. (Matter of Cameron v. … There was sufficient evidence to warrant the board’s finding and it should be upheld.

Bennett v. . Buchan

76 N.Y. 386 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 1879

The rule is laid down in Williamson v. Brown, ( 15 N. … (See also Reed v. Gannon, 50 N. Y., 349, 350 ; Pendleton v. Gray, 2 Paige, 202 ; Hawley v. Cramer, 4 Cow., 717 ; Baker v. Bliss, 39 N. Y., 70 ; Brown v. Volkening, 64 id., 76 .)

McLaughlin v. . Miller

124 N.Y. 510 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 7, 1891

(Harper v. Dowdney, 113 N. Y. 644 ; Lathers v. Keogh, 109 id. 583; DePeyster v. Murphy, 66 id. 622; Dowdney v. Mayor, etc., 54 id. 186.) … (Stuart v. Palmer, 74 N. Y. 183 ; Remsen v. Wheeler, 105 id. 573.)

8200 Realty Corp. v. Lindsay

27 N.Y.2d 124 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 1970

Although the association establishes this board as part of the condition of approval and provides the funds for its operation, the Mayor appoints the members of the board. … Chamberlin, Inc. v. Andrews, 271 N. Y. 1, 14 ; Nicchia v. New York, 254 U. S. 228 ; Charlotte, C. & A. R. R. Co. v. Gibbes, supra).

Wenzlick v. . McCotter

87 N.Y. 122 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 1881

And Moore v. Dame Browne (3 Dyer, 319), where the defendant’s husband wrongfully inserted a pipe into the plaintiff’s conduit, thereby drawing water at his pleasure to serve his house. … (Morris Canal, etc., Co. v. Ryerson, supra.) For do those cited by the respondent establish any different doctrine. In Brown v. Cay. & Sus. R. R. Co. ( 12 N.

Hunt v. Sharp

85 N.Y.2d 883 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 1995

Pipeline Co. v Wilderness Socy., 421 US 240, 247 ; Hooper Assocs. v AGS Computers, 74 NY2d 487, 491 ). … Although an unincorporated association and its individual board members may be conceptually separated for some legal purposes (see, e.g., Gem Music Corp. v Taylor, 294 NY 34 ; Polin v Kaplan, 257 NY 277 ; McCabe v *886 Goodfellow

In Re the Objections to the Certificates of Nomination of Hennessy

164 N.Y. 393 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 2, 1900

(Juliand v. Rathbone, 39 N. Y. 369 ; Ex parte Heath, 3 Hill, 42 .) … In the case of Wood v. Chapin ( 13 N.