Case law

Brown v. McClellan

217 A.D.2d 731 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 6, 1995

People v. Brown

145 A.D.2d 301 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 1, 1988

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, as we must (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 ), we find that the proof demonstrated no more than a purely subjective claim of pain, which is legally insufficient … Such evidence provides too scant a basis upon which to predicate a finding of substantial pain or physical impairment (see, e.g., People v Hargrove, 95 AD2d 864 ), and we modify accordingly.

People v. Brown

85 A.D.3d 1656 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 10, 2011

Schnyderite v. Brown

227 A.D.2d 286 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 21, 1996

the psychological aspect of petitioner’s retirement application, respondents were entitled to find that there was insufficient evidence to establish the existence of post traumatic stress syndrome (see, Matter of Whitton v … effectively, in making its recommendation that no causal connection exists between the incidents and the claimed disability (see, Matter of Bevers v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489 , lv denied 79 NY2d

People v. Brown

277 A.D.2d 107 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 21, 2000

(People v Benjamin, supra, at 271 .) … Accordingly, the officer acted appropriately when he touched the bulge, determined it was a hard object, and removed it (People v Woods, 64 NY2d 736, 737 ; People v Herring, supra, at 82 ; People v Scott, 197 AD2d 550, 551

People v. Brown

132 A.D.3d 412 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 1, 2015

As the People concede, defendant is entitled to resentencing for an express youthful offender determination (see People v Rudolph, 21 NY3d 497 [2013]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Acosta, Moskowitz and Richter, JJ.

People v. Brown

278 A.D. 576 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1951

(Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U. S. 458 ; People ex rel. Sedlak v. Foster, 59 N. Y. S. 2d 477, revd. on other grounds 274 App. Div. 850 , affd. 299 N. Y. 291 .) Carswell, Acting P.

People v. Brown

79 A.D.3d 1766 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 2010

Pollard v. Brown

127 A.D.2d 882 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 12, 1987

Brown and operated by defendant John L. Brown struck the rear of plaintiff’s car. … Frenire v Capital Dist.

People v. Brown

280 A.D.2d 609 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 20, 2001

After the defendant’s counsel exercised peremptory challenges to three white prospective jurors, the prosecutor raised a reverse-Batson objection (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79 ). … The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit (see, People v Garcia, 219 AD2d 669 ; People v Thomas, 174 AD2d 994 ). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Smith, JJ., concur.

People v. Brown

59 A.D.3d 561 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 10, 2009

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he received the effective assistance of counsel (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147 … The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Rivera, J.E, Miller, Garni and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

People v. Brown

127 A.D.2d 674 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 9, 1987

Chestnut, 51 NY2d 14 , cert denied 449 US 1018 ; People v Finlayson, 76 AD2d 670 , lv denied 51 NY2d 1011 , cert denied 450 US 931 ). … J., Thompson, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

People v. Brown

287 A.D.2d 464 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 1, 2001

v Bhoje, 275 AD2d 419 ; People v Ryan, 224 AD2d 644 ). … Furthermore, the use of a showup identification procedure was permissible in view of the close spatial and temporal proximity to the crime (see, People v Duuvon, 77 NY2d 541 ; People v Herrell, 278 AD2d 339 ).

People v. Brown

262 A.D.2d 569 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 21, 1999

taken from him at the time of his arrest, failing to respond meaningfully to the jury's request for a read-back of testimony, and because of prosecutorial misconduct relative to the questioning of a witness (see, People v

Brown v. Selsky

278 A.D.2d 779 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 28, 2000

Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the determination of guilt cannot stand inasmuch as it is not supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Bryant v Coughlin, 77 NY2d 642, 647 ). … circumstances, we conclude that the proof presented was inadequate to support the conclusion that petitioner utilized some type of threat to instill fear in the inmate, causing him to secure the $20 (see, id.; Matter of Greene v

Brown v. Sutter

60 A.D.2d 788 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 16, 1977

"The duty to fix damages in a personal injury action is a function of the jury and, unless the amount awarded is so grossly inadequate or excessive as to be unconscionable, it should not be disturbed” (Watson v Archer, 46

Brown v. Brown

258 A.D.2d 467 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 19, 1999

Even if we were to find that defendant’s proposed counterclaim validly set forth a cause of action for divorce on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment (see, Smith v Smith, 206 AD2d 255 , lv dismissed 84 NY2d 977 ) or … abandonment before the Referee would unjustifiably prejudice plaintiff by belatedly introducing an entirely new theory into the case (see, Symbax, Inc. v Bingaman, 219 AD2d 552, 553 ).

Iglesias v. Brown

59 A.D.3d 992 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 6, 2009

The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the motion of defendants Anne Brown and Vincent Brown seeking to bifurcate the trial. … At the time of the incident, plaintiffs son was at premises owned by Anne Brown and Vincent Brown (defendants) and leased to the two remaining defendants, who owned the dog.

People v. Brown

79 A.D.3d 1766 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 2010

People v. Brown

79 A.D.3d 1767 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 2010