Case law

Cohn v. Borchard Affiliations

25 N.Y.2d 237 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 1969

The preservation of unrestricted judicial power to dismiss is at the expense of the protection established for plaintiffs under CPLR 3216.” … As Justice Stevens pointed out in the course of his dissent below, the decision reached by his court not only frustrates the clearly expressed design and desire of the Legislature with respect to this particular question

Voorhis v. . Childs'

17 N.Y. 354 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 1858

Besides, these English decisions permitting the creditor to proceed in the first instance in equity against the estate of the deceased partner, are in conflict with the established doctrine that parties must first exhaust … If we are right in our reasoning, the complaint is clearly defective in this respect, and the judgment of the Supreme Court should therefore be affirmed.

Tautphoeus v. . H. S.B. S. Assn.

185 N.Y. 308 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 1906

The evidence of the defendant, which covers less than two printed pages of the record, not only fails to contradict the facts as established by plaintiff's witnesses, but is on the contrary confirmatory. … This is clearly an action at law, the trial of which was begun before a justice of the Supreme Court and a jury.

Barnes v. . Underwood

47 N.Y. 351 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 30, 1872

As to choses in action, marriage is only a qualified gift, conditioned that *354 -the husband reduce them to possession during the existence • of the marriage relation, and .when so recovered, the title vests absolutely in … But, whatever the foundation of the right, it «was firmly established, at common-law, and was absolute, 'exclusive and clearly defined. as a right to administer for his ■jiownlbenefit as the successor of his wife.

People v. . Budd

117 N.Y. 1 · New York Court of Appeals · Oct 15, 1889

upon any privilege or immunity protected by it. … Starin, 106 N.Y. 1 ); and the right to establish them rested exclusively in the crown or, in this country, in the people.

Brewster v. . Striker

2 N.Y. 19 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 1848

The claim of the grandchildren to the premises is under the direct devise to them as qualified by the subsequent limitation over; but the provisions of the will, as I understand them, qualify that devise still further, by … This decision goes the whole length of establishing the defence in this cause, and is in point against the plaintiff's claim of title.

In re the Arbitration between Country-Wide Insurance & Manning

62 N.Y.2d 748 · New York Court of Appeals · May 10, 1984

(Thom) ( 52 NY2d 1032 ) decided no more than that the Transit Authority did not qualify as a political subdivision exempted under subdivision 1 of section 370 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and was, therefore, as a self-insurer … That the city because it pays no insurance premiums and is not required to contribute to MVAIC operational assessments bears no part of the burden is simply irrelevant, both because the Legislature clearly so intended and

In Re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Kennedy

167 N.Y. 163 · New York Court of Appeals · May 14, 1901

The learned counsel for the proponents contends that this proof was admissible, and if he is correct in this position the error of the court in excluding it was clearly material. … There could be no separate or qualified judgment, but the instruments had to be either admitted or rejected. Under these circumstances, the admissions and declarations of the nephew were properly excluded.

Mead v. Bloom

62 N.Y.2d 788 · New York Court of Appeals · May 17, 1984

These holdings appeared to be the only appropriate response, given the policy, as established by Dole , that liability should be shared by joint tort-feasors in accordance with their respective degrees of fault. … As to the two actual wrongdoers, Karen Bloom and Hallman-Adkins, the statute is clearly applicable.

Grumet v. Board of Education

81 N.Y.2d 518 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 6, 1993

Indeed, if protecting citizens against abusive solicitation practices may be considered compelling (see, Larson v Valente, 456 US, at 248 ), surely the provision of special education services qualifies. … Finally, the board possesses all the powers, and is subject to all the duties, of trustees of common school districts, and has all the immunities and privileges enjoyed by the trustees of academies in this state.” (94 NY

People v. Baret

23 N.Y.3d 777 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 2014

a new rule under Teague ; rather, it followed from the clearly established principles of the guarantee of effective assistance of counsel under Strickland , and merely clarified the law as it applied to the particular facts … Equally, given the Supreme Court’s now extensive precedent, we are confident that Padilla does not qualify for Teague’s watershed exception.

Rozell v. Rozell

281 N.Y. 106 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 11, 1939

Immunity of the responsible parent to suit vanishes where there is injury to the infant’s property (see Beven on Negligence, supra; Domestic Relations Law, §§ 80 and 83, as amd.; Real Property Law, § 522 [Cons. … There is no occasion here to establish an exception to that maxim by judicial legislation vaguely gathered from the dubious implications of a legal institution. There is no sound public policy against enforcing it.

Westfall v. Hudson River Fire Insurance

2 N.Y. 289 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 15, 1855

This language, and still more clearly the statement annexed to the enumeration of the hazardous and extra-hazardous occupations and articles, to the effect that a specified additional premium will be required where these … If this is so, it is because the use of it is prohibited in a certain qualified manner. I do not see anything in the language of the instrument to warrant this construction.

Van Horne v. . Campbell

100 N.Y. 287 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 24, 1885

This is very clearly brought out in a striking passage from Hr. Hargrave (Harg. … The fact that Moses had himself devised the property was not referred to by the court, and was clearly immaterial.

New Jersey Steamboat Co. v. Mayor of New York

2 Silv. Ct. App. 23 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 1888

It is now argued by the plaintiff that the witness was not qualified to speak as an expert, and that the question “ is objectionable in form.” The objection was too general to raise these questions. … Clearly the question was inadmissible in substance. It submitted the whole case to the witness, whose testimony exhibited neither knowledge nor information on the subject.

Gorman v. Town of Huntington

12 N.Y.3d 275 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 7, 2009

Section 174-5 of the Town Code clearly states that service of the notice on a person other than the Town Clerk or Highway Superintendent “shall invalidate the notice.” … Like all my colleagues, I conclude that the Appellate Division erred in finding that estoppel has been established as a matter of law. It is not clear to me, however, that a basis for estoppel cannot be established.

Crane Neck Ass'n v. New York City/Long Island County Services Group

61 N.Y.2d 154 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 1984

We found in City of White Plains v Ferraioli ( 34 NY2d 300 , supra) that a group home consisting of a married couple, their two children and 10 foster children qualified as a family for purposes of a zoning ordinance, and … proper establishment of such facilities in the past, at great cost to the litigants.

MATTER OF BUSH v. Salerno

51 N.Y.2d 95 · New York Court of Appeals · Sep 5, 1980

Arney is not qualified to be a candidate for the primary election upon the ground that he has filed an insufficient number of valid signatures to permit him to be on the ballot. … Special Term's findings have been affirmed by an unanimous Appellate Division; and both courts below have determined that appellant Arney has an insufficient number of untainted signatures to qualify him as a candidate in

People v. Goggins

34 N.Y.2d 163 · New York Court of Appeals · May 15, 1974

In the Goggins case the right to disclosure was established on both of these grounds. … This informer could clearly play a decisive role in resolving the very colorable factual dispute between Barnes and Goggins. (See, e.g., accord Portemene v. United States, supra [cited with approval in Roviaro v.

Hutchins v. McGoldrick

307 N.Y. 78 · New York Court of Appeals · May 20, 1954

.) *85 The statute of 1951 — like its immediate predecessor — thus clearly distinguishes between conversions made prior to May 1, 1950, and those made thereafter. … That the conversion was easily established is not a bar to decontrol under the standard set by the Legislature.