Case law

Teddy's Drive In, Inc. v. Cohen

54 A.D.2d 898 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 1, 1976

Special Term dismissed plaintiff’s complaint as against Cohen upon the ground that, as a public officer, he was exercising a discretionary function in conducting the auction and was, therefore, immune from a suit to recover … The financing statement, submitted to this court as an exhibit by stipulation of the parties, clearly establishes that plaintiff had a perfected security interest in the subject property on June 9, 1972, the date of the filing

People v. Cahill

126 A.D. 391 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 12, 1908

He was not afforded complete immunity by section 41q of the Penal Code. That section makes an offender a competent witness against another person. … And further: “ We are clearly of opinion that no statute which leaves the party or witness subject to prosecution after he answers the criminating question put to him, can have the effect of supplanting the privilege conferred

Medical Soc. of Kings County v. Neff

53 N.Y.S. 1077 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 1, 1898

Clearly, then, the allegation of the society that it has an organization for “mental improvement” does not bring it within the contemplation of the statute. … One of the results of these medical societies has been to establish a practically uniform rate of charges, or at least to establish a minimum rate, and to afford a degree of protection to individual practitioners which would

Watson v. City of Jamestown

56 A.D.2d 1289 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 21, 2008

In addition, they established that they did not use process to gain an advantage at the civil service hearing. … We agree with defendants that they are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs arrest inasmuch as it was “objectively reasonable for the defendants to have believed that their conduct as related to the plaintiff

In re the Claim for Benefits under Article 18 of Labor Law

262 A.D. 605 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 12, 1941

The burden of establishing that it is a charitable institution rests upon the appellant. … Clearly, a hospital may claim exemption where it administers in part to pay patients and in part to patients unable to pay.

Christopher v. St. Vincent's Hospital & Medical Center

121 A.D.2d 303 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 24, 1986

In plaintiffs’ responding papers, which included submission of the hospital record, an affidavit was submitted by a qualified expert in which he concluded, on the basis of a study of the hospital record, that St. … Although aspects of the issues presented on this appeal raise troublesome questions, we are persuaded that the record as a whole fails to establish St.

Merchants Insurance Group v. Haskins

11 A.D.3d 694 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 25, 2004

Here, the unrefuted evidence established that Donati, a permissive user, left the van parked on a public roadway with the keys on the dashboard, thus precipitating the theft, and the resulting injuries to the claimant. … The theft report, admitted into evidence at the hearing without objection, qualified as a business record exception to the hearsay rule (see People v Meyers, 72 *696 Misc 2d 1003, 1007 [1973]), as it clearly identified Donati

Riddick v. City of New York

4 A.D.3d 242 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 24, 2004

Turning to the merits, we note that alcohol dependency qualifies as a disability under the Human Rights Law (Executive Law § 292 [21] [a]; see Matter of McEniry v Landi, 84 NY2d 554, 559 [1994]). … Indeed, plaintiff’s alcohol problem does not immunize him against the legitimate, nondiscriminatory legal action taken by the City in response to his violent criminal actions (see Matter of Hagmaier v Bratton, 245 AD2d 147

People v. Clark

94 A.D.2d 846 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 12, 1983

Merely establishing that the officer in charge of the jail who signed the report had a duty to record the incident was insufficient to qualify the report under the business record exception to the hearsay rule. … Defen *849 dant clearly was afforded meaningful representation CPeople vBaldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147 ). For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s conviction should be upheld in all respects. Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P.

Gerber v. City of New York

280 A.D.2d 289 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 6, 2001

The “any work” which East 72 could elect to perform was qualified by the words “in the premises.” … The two provisions imposing a duty on the tenant to maintain the sidewalk clearly distinguish between the premises and the sidewalk.

Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Public Service Commission

218 A.D.2d 421 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 29, 1996

The order did not establish the amount of the equalization fee, but solicited comments on that issue from the parties and continued the proceeding. … The determination clearly fell within the PSC’s area of expertise and involved both an interpretation of relevant statutory and regulatory provisions and a weighing of the relevant evidence.

Brown v. State

79 A.D.3d 1579 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 2010

The Court of Claims properly concluded that defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity pursuant to Weiss v Fote ( 7 NY2d 579 [I960]). … For example, in Alexander , the plaintiff established that there was an inadequate study and unreasonable basis for the defendant municipality’s traffic plan (id. at 466).

People v. Walker

185 A.D.2d 951 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 24, 1992

In any event, it is well established that guilty pleas will not be vacated merely because a defendant was unable or unwilling to describe or admit to the underlying facts of the charges where the pleas were entered into knowingly … Although the sentencing transcript is somewhat ambiguous on this point, it does clearly show that the defendant previously had been convicted of a Federal felony.

Green v. Lawrence Cement Co.

57 A.D. 284 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1901

But a careful examination of the evidence discloses that both of these witnesses siscnificantly qualified their testimony by the condition “ if there had been one in there large enough.” … Without proof, therefore, that the failure to provide such guards has caused this accident, the plaintiff has clearly failed to establish her cause of action. The judgment should, therefore, be reversed.

Singh v. State of New York

2025 NY Slip Op 04132 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 10, 2025

Moreover, contrary to claimant's contention, defendant in its answer clearly preserved the defense that the claim was untimely ( see Steele v State of New York , 145 AD3d at 1364 ; Augat v State of New York , 244 AD2d 835 … Therefore, claimant failed to establish that his assault was reasonably foreseeable and, as such, cannot establish the State's negligence ( see Vasquez v State of New York , 68 AD3d 1275, 1276 [3d Dept 2009]; Colon v State

McCormack v. Jewish Hospital

246 A.D. 731 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 15, 1935

It does not clearly appear in the record before us what the relationship was between those who were carrying the stretcher and the hospital, and in what capacity they were employed or serving the hospital. … In any event, defendant being a charitable institution, it is immune from liability. The wife was not a stranger to defendant.

Woods v. New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services

72 A.D.3d 474 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 8, 2010

Petitioner passed the examination and was placed on the list, which was established on May 5, 2004, and which expired on May 5, 2008. His ranking was 4694. … Clearly, the date of certification is different from the date of appointment. In Matter of Scanlan v Buffalo Pub.

Cacchillo v. Perales

172 A.D.2d 98 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 5, 1991

Although the County DSS did not comply with the request, the record establishes that petitioner’s counsel was given full access to the agency records in order to prepare for the hearing and that the agency willingly copied … Clearly, receiving these records in evidence did not deprive petitioner of a fair hearing and, thus, even if respondent was in error, such error alone is not sufficient to require annulment (see, Matter of Sowa v Looney,

People v. Whitehead

142 A.D.2d 745 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 7, 1988

The witness testified that rape trauma syndrome could cause a victim to deny having been raped, which is clearly relevant to the evidence defendant presented to establish that the victim had told others she had not been raped … The record discloses nothing which would establish that his "impartiality might reasonably be questioned” (22 NYCRR 100.3 [c] [1]).

Verdi v. Dinowitz

2024 NY Slip Op 04287 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 22, 2024

On this appeal, we are asked to decide whether Supreme Court should have dismissed plaintiff Manuele Verdi's defamation claims for failing to establish falsity, damages, or actual malice. … The court found that the law of the case doctrine required a finding that Dinowitz made defamatory remarks and was not entitled to absolute immunity.