Case law

Pennisi v. Standard Fruit & Steamship Co.

206 A.D.2d 290 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 14, 1994

Clearly, dismissal of the third-party complaint precluded Standard Fruit from taking further action with respect to its claim for indemnification. … The exclusivity provision of section 905 (a) immunizes such employer from third-party claims for contribution (Triguero v Consolidated Rail Corp., supra; Zapico v Bucyrus-Erie Co., supra).

In re Hannah U.

97 A.D.3d 908 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 12, 2012

As is relevant here, petitioner, as the party seeking to establish neglect, bore the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, first that the children’s “physical, mental or emotional condition [was] impaired … Further, any impairment to the children “must be clearly attributable to the unwillingness or inability of the respondent to exercise a minimum degree of care toward” them (Family Ct Act § 1012 [h]), rather than what may

M & R Real Estate, LLC v. Islip Apt. Corp.

2025 NY Slip Op 04778 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 27, 2025

pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) on the ground that a defense is founded on documentary evidence may be appropriately granted only where the documentary evidence utterly refutes the plaintiff's factual allegations, conclusively establishing … "Documents that qualify as documentary evidence include judicial records, mortgages, deeds, and contracts" ( Vasquez v Kennedy , 221 AD3d 936, 937 [internal quotation marks omitted]).

In re the Estate of Ferris

286 A.D. 631 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 16, 1955

Clearly the burden of proof was upon the petitioner, asserting residence and domicile in St. Lawrence County, to establish that allegation. The Surrogate was in error in ruling otherwise. … Even if decedent was *636 not qualified to vote in Brooklyn it does not demonstrate her residence in St. Lawrence County.

People v. Deacon

96 A.D.3d 965 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 20, 2012

The Supreme Court found, inter alia, that Brown’s testimony with respect to Watson’s alleged confession would not qualify as a statement against penal interest, as it was not established that Watson was unavailable, and there … The defendant did not establish entitlement to this relief.

In re the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of Crawford

218 A.D. 392 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 12, 1926

Said residuary clause creates a trust for the establishment of a public library in the village of Monticello, N. Y. … Had such been the intent of the Legislature, it would have been so clearly manifested as to place the construction of the statute beyond the realm of controversy.

In re New York Press Ass'n

29 A.D.2d 787 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 12, 1968

Subdivision 3 provides, among other things, that “ two or more qualified employers engaged in the same or a related trade, occupation, profession or enterprise”, as are appellant Press Association’s members, “may apply to … Thus would be effectuated the clearly defined legislative concept of a joint account system, the rule at the same time protecting the unemployment insurance fund against loss by application of rates determined without adequate

MTR OF HERZOG v. Joy

74 A.D.2d 372 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 15, 1980

subject to regulation *374 and control as provided for herein unless the city housing rent agency issues an order decontrolling such accommodation, which the agency shall do upon application by the landlord whenever it is established … Laura is clearly in occupancy, and her rent was paid by Marilyn, because, at least up to the time of the administrative proceedings, she did not have regular employment.

Mercer v. State Tax Commission

92 A.D.2d 636 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 3, 1983

In 1969, a dramatic increase in international business prompted the employer to establish a separate department in London to administer its international affairs. … Domiciliaries like petitioners can still qualify for nonresident tax treatment if they satisfy the conditions enumerated in section 605 (subd [a], par [1]) of the Tax Law.

Norr v. Spiegler

72 A.D.2d 20 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 3, 1980

Although Special Term’s compassionate purpose is appreciated, the theory advanced is clearly untenable. … Spiegler who brought this motion for summary judgment, not the city, and he clearly has taken a consistent position throughout the litigation.

Eddy v. Village of Ellicottville

35 A.D. 256 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1898

For if the duty of maintaining a village lockup or jail in a safe and healthful condition is a corporate one, that is, if it is one which falls wfitliin the second definition of municipal powers, then clearly the defendant … The Mayor (supra), “ when that line is ascertained it is not difficult to determine the rights of parties, for the rules of law are clear and explicit which establish the rights, immunities *259 and liabilities of the appellants

People v. Fox

119 A.D.2d 690 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 14, 1986

The record clearly established that the defendant’s statement was a "blurted out admission * * * which [was] in effect forced upon the officer” (People v Grimaldi, 52 NY2d 611, 617 ). … made subsequent to the witness’s testimony for the purpose of apprising the jurors that a question of law regarding competence had been discussed and that the court, after questioning the witness, had determined him to be qualified

In re the Arbitration between Hynson & American Motors Sales Corp.

164 A.D.2d 41 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 29, 1990

of the class of consumers entitled to invoke the benefits of the compulsory arbitration provision, and that the Supreme Court properly confirmed that portion of the arbitration award which determined that the petitioner qualified … established by the manufacturers themselves (see, Motor Vehicle Mfrs.

Lancaster v. 46 NYL Partners

228 A.D.2d 133 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 12, 1996

Accordingly, we find that the evi *140 dence at bar clearly establishes triable issues of fact as to their status as distributees. … that she was decedent’s common-law wife and, therefore, that she was a qualified distributee.

Matter of Cook v. Town Bd. of the Town of Southport

2026 NY Slip Op 03040 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 14, 2026

The Town Planning Board deemed Byrne Dairy's proposed use to qualify as a "convenience food mart" under the applicable zoning laws, designated the project as an unlisted action under the State Environmental Quality Review … As the Byrne Dairy project clearly qualifies as a "convenience food mart" within the meaning of the Town of Southport's zoning law, it was entirely rational for the Town Planning Board to review the application pursuant to

People v. Greene

153 A.D.2d 439 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 13, 1990

Likewise, a witness, for example, a physician, may qualify himself or herself from the "study of the subject alone” (Meiselman v Crown Hgts. Hosp., supra, at 398). … Moreover, any error with respect to the admission of this expert testimony was clearly harmless.

Wells v. New York Cent. & H. R. R.

78 N.Y.S. 991 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 9, 1902

With these facts fully established, it is now insisted by the learned counsel for the defendant that the contributory negligence of the deceased was so clearly established as to require the court to dispose of that question … The question of damages was likewise one with which the jury was especially qualified to deal, and their conclusion, unless clearly the result of prejudice, passion, or partiality, ought not to be interfered with.

Claim of Adams v. New York, Ontario & Western Railway Co.

175 A.D. 714 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 29, 1916

That clearly appears, not only from said sections 15 and 16,.hut also from other sections, including section 25 (as amd. by Laws of 1915, chap. 167), which is entitled, “Compensation, how payable,” and provides as follows … That such was the purpose of the statute is clear from the qualifying expression therein contained, “provided the same shall be in the interest of justice.”

In re Sharnetta N.

120 A.D.2d 276 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 4, 1986

The evidence was at least sufficient to establish that Sharnetta was neglected. … Although there are cases holding that a finding of neglect or abuse as to one child is admissible on similar issues as to that child’s siblings, the evidence here is clearly sufficient to distinguish Sharnetta’s condition

People v. Rosado

244 A.D.2d 772 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 26, 1997

Defendant waived immunity and testified before the Grand Jury. … Clearly, the jury, as trier of fact, had an ample basis to reject defendant’s affirmative defense of duress.