Case law

DiFlorio v. Worden

303 A.D.2d 924 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 21, 2003

The expert failed, however, to identify any specific rule or procedure that was violated, and thus his testimony was merely conclusory and failed to establish that defendants violated a clearly defined, fixed or “immutable … Defendants are immune from liability for errors in judgment in responding to an unfolding emergency situation (see Kenavan, 70 NY2d at 569 ). “ ‘[I]mmunity reflects a value judgment that— despite injury to a member of the

People v. Vaughn

275 A.D.2d 484 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 3, 2000

The record establishes that by September 1, 1994, the police possessed information establishing a relationship between defendant and Price, resulting largely from defendant’s periodic stays at Price’s apartment, that defendant … Although these statements were made at a time when defendant was in jail as the result of an illegal arrest for criminal possession of a controlled substance, such arrest does not confer upon defendant unlimited immunity

Lane v. Hustace

154 A.D. 636 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 10, 1913

Two of them renounced, the third alone qualifying and' making the contract to sell real estate. … Without the intention so to do clearly manifested the general rule of law as expressed in this section must prevail.”

People v. Robins

242 A.D. 516 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 7, 1934

Because very often our own men are not qualified to do the same work. Q. Are not qualified to do what? A. In our particular case, different ldnd of filling out applications, great many questions. Q. … On the contrary, the defense is as honorable, and when clearly proved, as satisfactory, as any defense which the law permits.”

People v. Williams

139 A.D.2d 683 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 18, 1988

In the instant case, the defense counsel clearly created the inference that Edwards’ testimony was devised well after the event in order to meet the exigencies of the case. … Edwards’ testimony was clearly not critical on the issue of identification inasmuch as the defendant acknowledged that he had accompanied Edwards to the scene of the robbery.

Ganje v. Yusuf

133 A.D.3d 954 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 5, 2015

However, the final assignment of judgment to Bosco Trust expressly references the Yusuf judgment by name, date and amount, thus establishing the holder thereof. … "Materials that clearly qualify as documentary evidence include documents reflecting out-of-court transactions such as mortgages, deeds, contracts, and any other papers, the contents of which are essentially undeniable" (

Jajoute v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

242 A.D.2d 674 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 29, 1997

Certainly for treatment to qualify as continuous, it must be for the same condition as gave rise to the lawsuit (see, Nykorchuck v Henriques, 78 NY2d 255 ). … The Court clearly gave effect to this rule in Gudmundson and it is equally applicable to the instant case.

People v. Panyko

71 A.D. 324 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 15, 1902

Both the defendants are clearly associated with the crime charged in the indictment. … She was not dis *327 qualified from giving evidence. She was not an accomplice; and even if she were, she would be permitted to testify. In People v. Powell (4 N. Y. Cr.

Washington-Herrera v. Town of Greenburgh

101 A.D.3d 986 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 19, 2012

Accordingly, he established, prima facie, his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the false arrest and false imprisonment causes of action by showing that the plaintiffs confinement was privileged (id.; … In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ contentions regarding Olson’s claim of entitlement to qualified immunity (see Foley v County of Suffolk, 80 AD3d 658, 660 [2011]).

People v. Garcia

269 A.D.2d 464 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 14, 2000

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the pros *465 ecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 ), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. … Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88 ).

Fehringer v. MLJ Contr. Corp.

2026 NY Slip Op 03779 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 17, 2026

Although the agreement concerned a prior incident from which liability could arise, nothing therein clearly and unequivocally evinced an intent to release the defendant from the consequences of its own alleged negligence … "To qualify as documentary evidence, the evidence 'must be unambiguous and of undisputed authenticity'" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d 971 , 973, quoting Fontanetta v John Doe 1 , 73 AD3d 78, 86 ).

MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal

193 A.D.2d 978 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 20, 1993

On review, Telecom argues that reasonable cause should be found to exist due to, inter alia, the rapidly changing technology in the telecommunications field, the uncertainty surrounding which of its assets qualified for the … At all times relevant hereto, 20 NYCRR former 536.1 (b) provided, in pertinent part, that "[g]rounds for reasonable cause, where clearly established, may include * * * pending petition to Tax Commission * * * involving a

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Bongiorno

237 A.D.2d 31 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 8, 1997

This narrow question and our conclusion that the appellant cannot be compelled to divulge the content of the confidential records is not a suggestion or determination that his youthful offender adjudication renders him immune … The record and briefs clearly indicate that this is the understanding of the parties as well.

Goelet v. Confidential, Inc.

5 A.D.2d 226 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 11, 1958

In judging the sufficiency of the complaint, certain well-established principles must be applied. In Gautier v. Pro-Football ( 304 N. … However, tbe instant case is clearly distinguishable. In Sutton a person known only to her friends and acquaintances was plucked out of obscurity and cast into tbe public eye.

People v. Ayala

142 A.D.2d 147 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 21, 1988

In fact, application of the well-established law of New York to the statements at issue in the instant case unequivocally demonstrates that the statements do not qualify as declarations against penal interest and were improperly … In his statement, Ortiz clearly sought to minimize his role in this crime and shift blame elsewhere by indicating that he drove a certain person to a location to "get even” but never left his car during the altercation and

Nova Casualty Co. v. Central Mutual Insurance

59 A.D.3d 777 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 5, 2009

Plaintiff ultimately agreed to defend Bennett in that action, but disclaimed coverage citing two exclusions contained in the policy that it maintained immunized it from having to pay any damages caused by this fire. … Here, the uncontroverted testimony established that Bennett and Pesano were not using a paint; instead, they were applying a product called “Cabot Clear Solution.”

Wright v. Town Board

41 A.D.2d 290 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 13, 1973

Thereafter a petition was submitted to the Town Board requesting a referendum which was ordered to be held on April 29, 1971 and at which all duly qualified electors were permitted to vote as well as “ owners of taxable real … Further, the Town Law clearly provides a format for when (§ 236) and how (§ 237) the assessment shall be made, how it shall be published and how" it can be challenged (§ 239).

Khrapunskiy v. Doar

49 A.D.3d 201 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 17, 2008

While ASP clearly was intended as a state funded supplement to the federally funded SSI payments so that aged, blind and disabled persons would continue to receive benefits consistent *206 with the standard of need established … in Social Services Law § 209 (2), the fact is that for 22 years all needy aged, blind and disabled persons in the state, other than illegal aliens, were eligible for both SSI and ASE Clearly, the Legislature’s intention

People v. Tucker

33 A.D.2d 823 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 4, 1969

Parker was called, but he refused to answer any questions upon the grounds of his constitutional right not to incriminate himself, even though he had previously testified before a Grand Jury as to this case and was granted immunity … The trial court in its charge to the jury stated that this conversation was contrary to Coleman’s testimony as to defendant’s participation in the crime and very clearly permitted the jury to utilize the testimony as a basis

Saratoga Trap Rock Co. v. Standard Accident Insurance

143 A.D. 852 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 8, 1911

Clearly the interest which accumulated on the judgment pending the appeal cannot be said to be any part of the cost of defense of the action which the insuring- company agreed to pay. … It is not an agreement to save harmless or to pay when liability shall be established.