Case law

Merice v. County of Westchester

305 A.D.2d 383 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 2003

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant’s motion for summary judgment since the appellant failed to demonstrate that it was entitled to the qualified immunity protection afforded by Social Services Law § 149. … It is well settled that a claim of qualified immunity cannot be raised to bar inquiry into an agency’s or county’s alleged negligent supervision of children in foster care (see Barnes v County of Nassau, 108 AD2d 50 [1985

Foley v. County of Suffolk

80 A.D.3d 658 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 18, 2011

The Supreme Court granted the Town’s motion, finding that the Town established, prima facie, that it was entitled to qualified immunity from liability arising from its highway planning decisions, and in opposition, the plaintiff … In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ remaining contentions regarding the Town’s entitlement to qualified immunity or proximate cause. The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit.

William M. v. Laub

149 A.D.2d 475 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 10, 1989

An analysis of Social Services Law § 419 and its companion provisions of the Child Protective Services Act (Social Services Law, art 6, tit 6) establishes that the immunity afforded by the statute extends to those such as … Social Services Law § 419 grants a qualified immunity from civil or criminal liability to "[a]ny person, official, or institution participating in good faith in the providing of a service pursuant to section four hundred

McCord v. City of New York

298 A.D.2d 438 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 15, 2002

The Supreme Court granted the respondents’ motion for summary judgment, concluding, among other things, that the decision to lock the doors was protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Consequently, the doctrine of qualified immunity is applicable and the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents’ motion. Altman, J.P., Smith, H. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

Duffy v. Wetzler

174 A.D.2d 253 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1992

We add only the observation that the defense of qualified immunity, which the court did not reach (see, Duffy v Wetzler, 148 Misc 2d 459, 469 , supra), provided a much simpler basis on which to reject the claims. … The claimed right under 4 USC § ill was not "clearly established” until Davis , and so the individual defendants are "shielded from liability for civil damages.”

Rosen & Bardunias v. County of Westchester

158 A.D.2d 679 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 26, 1990

With regard to these claims, the defendants were acting only in an investigatorial capacity, and thus were correctly held to enjoy only a qualified immunity from civil liability (see, Bacon v County of Westchester, 149 AD2d … In the case at bar, the plaintiffs have alleged that the defendant Willcox committed intentional and malicious acts during the investigatory phase of the plaintiffs’ prosecution which are clearly beyond the scope of his authority

Bailey v. Honda Motor Co.

144 A.D.2d 119 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 20, 1988

funding constraints prevented it from placing temporary or permanent markings (see, Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 287 ) and submitted no evidence to establish that the decision involved the expertise of qualified … immunity.

Dodge v. County of Erie

140 A.D.3d 1678 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 10, 2016

We further conclude that defendant failed to establish on its motion its entitlement as a matter of law to the qualified immunity set forth in Weiss v Fote ( 7 NY2d 579, 585 [1960], rearg denied 8 NY2d 934 [I960]). … immunity {Brown v State of New York, 79 AD3d 1579, 1582 [2010], citing Cummins v County of Onondaga, 198 AD2d 875, 877 [1993], affd 84 NY2d 322 [1994]).

Miserendino v. Cai

2023 NY Slip Op 04031 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 28, 2023

Plaintiffs further contend that, although defendants established that Cai's written statements are subject to a qualified privilege, plaintiffs raised an issue of fact whether the statements were made with malice, which would … "A qualified privilege 'places the burden of proof on this issue [of malice] upon the plaintiff' " ( id. , quoting Toker , 44 NY2d at 219).

Satler v. Larsen

131 A.D.2d 125 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 29, 1987

Clearly, Ms. McHatten understood that the basis for the BCW report was not some undisclosed set of impliedly scandalous facts, but the opinion held by Dr. … It is well established that expressions of opinion are constitutionally protected and hence, nonactionable.

Betts v. Town of Mount Morris

78 A.D.3d 1597 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 12, 2010

With respect to its defense of qualified immunity, we conclude that the Town failed to meet its initial burden of demonstrating that its decisions regarding design, maintenance and signage were “the product of a deliberative … The Town also failed to establish as a matter of law that its alleged negligence was not a proximate cause of the accident (see Appelbaum, 222 AD2d at. 989-990; cf. Howard v Tylutki, 305 AD2d 907, 908 [2003]).

Verizon New York, Inc. v. Optical Communications Group, Inc.

91 A.D.3d 176 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 1, 2011

It found that the defendant’s denial of the plaintiffs claim did not qualify as a tort, even in light of the regulatory scheme established by the Insurance Law: “To be sure, the provisions of the Insurance Law *182 reflect … The argument fails since the denial was clearly not on the merits.

DiPalma v. Phelan

179 A.D.2d 1009 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 31, 1992

Because neither case law nor statute clearly establishes that a sex crime victim’s constitutional right to privacy is violated by the disclosure of her identity, defendant Phelan’s discretionary determination to provide plaintiff … ’s deposition to the Town Board, which was considering disciplinary action against plaintiff’s father, was entitled to qualified immunity (see, Davis v Scherer, 468 US 183, 194 ; Shabazz v Coughlin, 852 F2d 697, 700-702).

Memory Gardens, Inc. v. D'Amico

91 A.D.2d 1160 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 27, 1983

Special Term was correct in stating that *1161 while defendant would be immunized from liability under the established rule that pertinent statements made in the course of judicial proceedings are absolutely privileged (Pecue … A qualified privilege, while affording less than immunity, should not be cavalierly dismissed as inadequate. “Only those who act out of malice, rather than public interest, need hesitate before speaking.

Agovino v. Taco Bell 5083

225 A.D.2d 569 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 11, 1996

. • The qualified immunity from disclosure provided by CPLR 3101 (d) (2), for materials prepared "in anticipation of litigation or for trial”, by or for another party, or by or for that other party’s representative, is lifted … Because we find that the appellants have failed to sustain their burden of establishing that the documents are exempt, we need not reach their remaining contentions. Mangano, P.

Racalbuto v. Redmond

46 A.D.3d 1051 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 13, 2007

Supreme Court granted the motion, finding that defendant was entitled to qualified immunity for its highway planning decisions. Plaintiffs appeal. … Because defendant established its entitlement to summary *1052 judgment, we affirm.

Amato v. County of Erie

247 A.D.2d 846 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 4, 1998

The municipalities contend that they should have been granted summary judgment because they are entitled to qualified immunity for their traffic engineering decisions and because, under the circumstances, the failure to upgrade … The County, which the record shows was solely responsible for traffic control at the intersection, failed to establish its defense of qualified immunity as a matter of law.

Drake v. County of Herkimer

15 A.D.3d 834 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 4, 2005

Thus, in the field of traffic design engineering, the municipality is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision (see Friedman, 67 NY2d at 283 ; Alexander v Eldred, 63 NY2d 460 … Pursuant to that doctrine of qualified immunity, “liability for injury arising out of the operation of a duly executed highway safety plan may only be predicated on proof that the plan either was evolved without adequate

Hudson Valley Marine, Inc. v. Town of Cortlandt

79 A.D.3d 700 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 7, 2010

As for the plaintiffs 42 USC § 1983 claims asserted against Miller and Conlon, they established, prima facie, their entitlement to qualified immunity by demonstrating that it was objectively reasonable for them to believe … that their acts did not violate clearly established constitutional or statutory rights regardless of whether they made a mistake of law or fact in applying the Town Code (see Pearson v Callahan, 555 US 223 , —, 129 S Ct

Estate of Hamzavi v. State

43 A.D.3d 1430 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 28, 2007

Finally, we reject the further contention of defendant that its highway planning decisions are entitled to qualified immunity and thus that its motion should have been granted in its entirety. … “[I]t is defendant who has the burden initially of demonstrating, prima facie, its right to judgment on the basis of qualified immunity; it must show that the decision [with respect to the design and construction of the guiderail