Case law

In re Ireland

246 A.D. 113 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 8, 1936

Thereafter he duly qualified as such committee. Although the record is not entirely clear it seems that respondent was committed for treatment to the Hudson River State Hospital. … The respondent should be protected against the loss of this property and his committee should not be removed unless it clearly appears that he is competent to manage his affairs.

People v. Krull

2022 NY Slip Op 04783 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 2, 2022

The court found that clear and convincing evidence established that defendant committed the acts underlying his convictions. … The specific flaw in the analysis is clearly demonstrated in the SORA court's conclusion here—a defendant who was assessed points under risk factor 12 when invoking his right against self-incrimination can be denied a downward

Consolidated Edison Co. v. City of New Rochelle

140 A.D.2d 125 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 12, 1988

The enactment of Public Service Law § 31 *131 (4) evinces a legislative intent to end such varying practices, establish uniformity, and ensure that qualified customers receive extensions of service line from the main to their … No party has disputed the abilities of the plaintiffs qualified employees to perform such work.

In re Miller

224 A.D. 411 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 2, 1928

They have set forth facts to establish their right to register and vote. In Matter of Goodman ( 146 N. … In other words, an institution wholly or partly supported by private charity as distinguished from public expense would clearly be within its scope.

Eustathopoulo v. Gillespie

218 A.D. 179 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 5, 1926

There is no ground for the claim made by plaintiffs that this very cable sent by defendants on December second established a meeting of the minds. … by conditions or reservations, however slight they may have been, the universal rule seems to be that no valid contract is thereby established, but that such a modified or qualified acceptance must rather be treated as a

Ebert v. Ebert

47 A.D.2d 992 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 17, 1975

While expressing affection for their mother both children clearly stated a preference to live with the father. … A qualified psychologist testified that in his opinion "it would be more desirable for the children to remain under the protection of the father in an atmosphere they feel more secure.”

People v. Mosby

78 A.D.3d 1371 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 18, 2010

The conversation clearly implicated defendant in ongoing drug activity, and nothing said during it was exculpatory or could have been used to support his proposed agency defense. … To establish such a claim, “defendant must demonstrate that his attorney failed to provide meaningful representation” (People v Caban, 5 NY3d *1373 143, 152 [2005]).

People v. Rojas

51 A.D.2d 589 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 26, 1976

Also at that trial, Jusimo testified that he had been granted immunity. The prosecutor, however, in the presence of the jury, promptly denied that Jusimo had been granted immunity. … In our opinion, however, appellant has clearly established from the above sequence of events, the Maldonado and Gustavo *591 Cintron plea and sentence minutes and the testimony adduced at the post-judgment hearing, that "

People v. Doe

61 A.D.2d 426 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 1, 1978

Having established that the integrity of family relational interests is clearly entitled to constitutional protection, we turn to an examination of the nature of the interest asserted in the case before us. … That is not to say, however, that parents in this setting are immune from Grand Jury process.

MTR. OF BD. OF EDUC. v. Allen

6 A.D.2d 316 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 31, 1958

against its establishment. … asking for the organization of a central school district and the establishment of a central school therein.

People v. Love

129 A.D.2d 258 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 10, 1987

For purposes of determining whether a prior conviction qualifies as a predicate felony conviction, warranting the enhanced punishment authorized by statute, sentence upon such prior conviction must have been imposed not more … The People contend that Penal Law § 70.06 (1) (b) (v) clearly provides that "any period of time” for which a person was incarcerated "for any reason” (emphasis added) shall be excluded from the 10-year period, and since the

Craven v. Rigas

71 A.D.3d 1220 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 4, 2010

Notably, the reference does not qualify the debt owed to plaintiff under the note (see Smith v Shields Sales Corp., 22 AD3d at 944 ). Moreover, the evidence of setoffs does not preclude application of CPLR 3213. … Thus, plaintiff established a prima facie case and the burden shifted to defendant to raise a triable issue of fact regarding a bona fide defense to liability on the note (see Security Mut. Life Ins.

People v. DeFreece

183 A.D.2d 842 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 18, 1992

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a light most favorable to the People (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 ), we find that it was 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 ).

State v. Breeyear

55 A.D.3d 1033 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 16, 2008

Defendants’ obligation to indemnify plaintiff was not conditioned upon a finding that defendants, or any of their employees, were negligent nor was it altered or qualified in any way by Chmielewsky’s status as a special employee … Nevertheless, this Court has the authority to review the record and grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party where the record, as presented, clearly establishes that the party is entitled to such relief (see CPLR 3212

People v. Krull

2022 NY Slip Op 04783 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 2, 2022

The court found that clear and convincing evidence established that defendant committed the acts underlying his convictions. … The specific flaw in the analysis is clearly demonstrated in the SORA court's conclusion here—a defendant who was assessed points under risk factor 12 when invoking his right against self-incrimination can be denied a downward

Haussman v. Kirby

96 A.D.2d 244 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 7, 1983

Initially, we note that the fact that the petitioner was able to establish by means of a stipulation of settlement her claim that the agency had acted in violation of her rights after she had failed at Special Term in her … Whether any other circumstance exists which would qualify as a special circumstance requiring denial of a fee should be determined on remittitur to Special Term.

Westbrook v. WR Activities-Cabrera Markets

5 A.D.3d 69 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 9, 2004

The Court relied on photographs revealing that the presence of the platform was not as clearly discernible from the rear as it was from the front, due to the presence of circular display racks (id. at 1073). … Finally, while defendant contends that plaintiff failed to establish that it had actual or constructive notice since the manager’s testimony with respect to stocking procedures did not establish notice of this particular

Manhattan Industries, Inc. v. Tully

88 A.D.2d 737 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 27, 1982

It is also well established that statutory tax exemptions are construed against the taxpayer (Matter of Airlift Int. u State Tax Comm., 52 AD2d 688 ). … We would also note that Matter ofLaux Ado. v Tully ( 67 AD2d 1066 ), relied on by petitioner, is clearly distinguishable due to the fact that the materials in question herein were not, as in Laux, kept for the advertising

Fossella v. Adams

2024 NY Slip Op 00891 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 21, 2024

than on the plaintiff to affirmatively establish its standing" ( U.S. … While the plaintiffs urge this Court to interpret "people" as meaning, i.e., solely referring to, citizens qualified to vote statewide, it is my view that they have failed to meet their burden of establishing as much beyond

Gerry v. Volger

252 A.D. 217 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 1, 1937

In 1937 the Legislature reversed its position upon that subject by withdrawing sex as a qualifying factor. … This change was accomplished by amendment to the Judiciary Law, a general statute, without expressly repealing the prior statute of 1895 which the defendant now invokes but which is clearly inconsistent with “ the will of