Case law

Matter of Ibhawa v. New York State Div. of Human Rights

2024 NY Slip Op 05872 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 2024

Among these defenses was the assertion that Ibhawa's entire complaint fell within the "ministerial exception" because the Diocese is a religious institution and Ibhawa qualified as a "minister" for purposes of the exception … The Diocese argued that Ibhawa's complaint should be dismissed because its "determination as to who will lead a congregation and teach its faith clearly falls within this [statutory] exception."

Curtis and Others v. . Leavitt

15 N.Y. 9 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 1857

And unless it can be established that these bodies are hedged in by some special immunity, and are not subject to the laws of justice and equity which apply to natural persons, he may also show that the corporation, with … These facts must be established by the proof. The onus rests upon him.

NY CHARTER SCHOOL v. DiNAPOLI

13 N.Y.3d 120 · New York Court of Appeals · Jun 25, 2009

If so, they would clearly be auditable by the Comptroller—but at his or her discretion, not the direction of the Legislature ( see Patterson v Carey, 41 NY2d 714, 723-724 [1977]). … Clearly, one of the purposes in creating charter schools was to foster more innovative and experimental education environments.

Borden v. 400 East 55th Street Associates, L.P.

24 N.Y.3d 382 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 24, 2014

To qualify for the J-51 program exemption, landlords must relinquish their rights under the decontrol provisions of the RSL while they benefit from the exemption. … The RSL also clearly distinguishes between the compensatory “award” for which a four-year statute of limitations applies and the “penalty of three times the overcharge” for which a two-year statute of limitations applies

Tobias Bermudez Chavez v. Occidental Chemical Corporation

New York Court of Appeals · Oct 20, 2020

The court qualified the scope of its injunction in a later order, stating that it “did not intend such a broad reading of its orders. . . . … The plaintiffs had every reason to believe that class relief was available until class certification was clearly and unambiguously denied on the merits in 2010.

Matter of Hearst v. . Woelper

183 N.Y. 274 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 13, 1905

The object of election laws is to secure the rights of duly qualified electors, and not to defeat them. … Our decision in the Stewart Case (supra) establishes every principle required to affirm the order we are now considering.”

In Re the Accounting of Kelly

285 N.Y. 139 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 1941

The will was admitted to probate on January 4, 1938, and letters testamentary were issued to those named by deceased under which they qualified as executors of his estate, entered upon the discharge of their duties and are … Y. 177, 180 ). • To establish that a gift had been made, the burden rested upon respondents to show by the clearest evidence each and every element essential to establish that a gift was made (Boyd v. v.

Rinaldi v. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc.

42 N.Y.2d 369 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 14, 1977

The public, clearly, has a vital interest in the performance and integrity of its judiciary. … Furthermore, the book was clearly not designed to be an objective account of plaintiffs judicial dispositions.

Bethel v. McGrath-McKechnie

95 N.Y.2d 7 · New York Court of Appeals · May 16, 2000

Although the term “promotion” is not explicitly defined in the Civil Service Law, the law clearly distinguishes between open competitive examinations and promotional examinations. … Order reversed, etc. * CDA was an agency established under the auspices of the New York City Human Resources Administration.

People v. Leyra

302 N.Y. 353 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 12, 1951

If they were properly received in evidence, followed by proper instructions from the court, the verdict would be clearly warranted, and we could not interfere with the execution of sentence for these brutal crimes. … After some colloquy the court agreed, withdrew its original instructions in this respect, and then charged the jury in effect that they had to find a promise of complete immunity by the doctor or none at all, and only if

People v. Phillips

16 N.Y.3d 510 · New York Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2011

While Capruso detected that defendant had some rudimentary understanding of what happened at a trial, he found, as had the Bellevue evaluators, that defendant’s ability to establish a working relationship with an attorney … Indeed, the court stated quite clearly on the record that Dr.

Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n v. City of New York

41 N.Y. 205 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1976

Wein v City of New York, 36 NY2d 610, 619-620 ) Turning then to the question of whether the Federal contract clause prohibits the wage freeze, the principles are well established. … This principle was derived from the ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Home Bldg. & Loan Assn, v Blaisdell ( 290 US 398 ) wherein it was stated (pp 434-435): "Not only is the constitutional provision qualified by

Baucus v. . Stover

89 N.Y. 1 · New York Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 1882

The statutes referred to were passed mostly at the same time, and to establish a system applicable to estates and the accounting and acts of executors and administrators, and they must all be swept away and rendered of no … The weight of authority in thiá State is clearly adverse to the appellant’s claim.

Higbie v. Westlake

4 N.Y. 281 · New York Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 1856

The administrator swears to one hundred and forty days, nearly five months in gross; and to justify the charge, he says he could not establish himself in any other business while this matter was going on. … We see clearly that the sum allowed by the surrogate was quite too large, and that judgment w*as therefore properly reversed by the supreme court.

LeChase Data/Telecom Services v. Goebert

6 N.Y.3d 281 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2006

The Appellate Division noted that the New York “rule of first in, first out” (id.) meant that all of the trust funds had been expended long before the bank seized the balance—a circumstance clearly and completely different … These factors bear on notice, but would not establish actual, subjective knowledge.

People v. . Sharp

107 N.Y. 427 · New York Court of Appeals · Nov 29, 1887

He was, therefore, qualified under that section (79) as a "competent witness." Against whom? … Clearly there is to be an investigation, in the language of section 79, of a charge of bribery of a public officer, with an intent to influence him in the exercise of his powers.

People v. C. Klinck Packing Co.

214 N.Y. 121 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 1915

For the purpose of determining whether it is thus immune we shall first briefly consider its important features and purposes and the effects which it can be seen will naturally flow from its operation. “ The purpose of (such … But these are they who work in factories and mercantile establishments.

People v. Onofre

51 N.Y.2d 476 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 1980

The “fundamental” rights recognized in Griswold, Roe and their progeny are clearly not a product of a belief on the part of the Supreme Court that modern values and changing standards of morality should be incorporated wholesale … the Supreme Court decisions makes clear that the rights which have so far been recognized as part of our due process guarantee are those rights to make certain familial decisions which have been considered sacrosanct and immune

Wheeler v. Oceanic Steam Navigation Co.

3 Silv. Ct. App. 276 · New York Court of Appeals · Jan 13, 1891

They are not used disjunctively, and so as to constitute a separate command, but qualify the expression “ shall not be liable as carrier thereof; ” the full force of the words being that the liability as carrier shall not … If it is desired that a clause shall cover losses by negligence, it is not too much to say that the purpose must be clearly expressed. Id. The case of Oppenheimer v. United States E. Co., 9 Alb. L.

Dillenbeck v. Hess

73 N.Y.2d 278 · New York Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 1989

Physician-patient communications, privileged under CPLR 4504, may therefore be shielded from discovery and when it has been established that the requested information is subject to discovery under CPLR 3121 (a), the burden … The suggestion in the dissent that defendant’s blood alcohol test results may not qualify as a "communication” protected under CPLR 4504 is clearly erroneous and directly contradicted by the case law and expert authorities