Case law

Fasano v. State

113 A.D.2d 885 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 23, 1985

Leale’s testimony, in conjunction with the police officer’s postincident observation of the accident scene, clearly supports a conclusion that claimant’s vehicle exited the roadway on the left shoulder in the area of the … Thus, the officer was well qualified to render an expert opinion as to the cause of claimant’s accident and his opinion was entitled to great weight (see, Blake v City of Albany, 48 NY2d 875 , supra; Larsen v Vigliarolo Bros

Rendely v. Town of Huntington

44 A.D.3d 864 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 16, 2007

It is undisputed that the petitioner’s hearing testimony and the evidence that she submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals in support of her application established that the ways in which she stated that she intended to … use the proposed structure qualified as “accessory uses” (Town of Huntington Code § 198-2 *866 [B]).

Rigie v. Goldman

148 A.D.2d 23 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 26, 1989

Rather, the court intended to carve out a limited exception where the probative value of the habit evidence was substantial and clearly outweighed the danger of creating collateral issues or of confusing, misleading or prejudicing … professional’s routine and regular practices was admitted in malpractice trials (see, e.g., Meyer v United States, 638 F2d 155 [practice of warning patients of the risks involved in the extraction of third molars]; In re Swine Flu Immunization

Kerr Steamship Co. v. Chartered Bank of India, Australia & China

266 A.D. 367 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 22, 1943

Notwithstanding the numerous issues apparently raised by the pleadings, the facts are not in dispute and are established chiefly by stipulated admissions. … On this record if plaintiff does not obtain rescission, the documents may never be paid and clearly were not paid within the interval contemplated by the agreement.

People v. Brumfield

2025 NY Slip Op 00764 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 7, 2025

Indeed, "almost all of the relevant facts adduced at trial [with respect to that issue] were [either] undisputed [or clearly established]. … Instead, [on the [*3]issue of the type of firearm allegedly possessed by defendant], the jury was asked to make inferences based on the evidence, a task that we are no less qualified to make" ( id. ).

Travis v. American Cities Co.

192 A.D. 16 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 14, 1920

It was provided that sufficient shares of each of the underlying companies whose stock was pledged to the trust company under said indenture as might be required to qualify directors in each of said underlying *20 companies … A further ground for denying the right to impose a tax under said statute lies in the well-established principle that laws relating to taxable transfers must show a clear legislative intention to tax.

In re the Arbitration between Board of Education & Buffalo Council of Supervisors & Administrators

52 A.D.2d 220 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 21, 1976

(supra), clearly invites judicial inquiry when public policy questions are involved. … Bank, 96 Mich 426 [alderman held absolutely privileged with respect to contents of resolution he presented at meeting of Common Council]; see, also, Carter v Jackson, 10 Utah 2d 284 [by statute, City Council member was immune

Walsh v. Tax Appeals Tribunal

196 A.D.2d 367 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 24, 1994

Petitioner’s attempt to take advantage of the amnesty program and at the same time avoid the legislatively mandated consequence of participation in the program neither "qualified” his application to participate in the program … penalties and was not subject to any civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding for his failure to pay taxes on his retirement payments when the taxes were due, petitioner continued to seek that to which he clearly

Matter of Rye Country Day Sch. v. Whitty

2023 NY Slip Op 00323 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 25, 2023

Further, RCDS established that the townhouses were "used to attract talent that would otherwise look [elsewhere] for employment," and it "would have difficulty recruiting qualified [faculty] if it did not provide the housing … The respondents acknowledge that "gaining high level instructors is clearly necessary and incidental to the education of young students."

Bauchle v. Smylie

104 A.D. 513 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 15, 1905

In the following June,, however, the plaintiff qualified and letters testamentary were then issued to her. 1 At the time of Mr. … all respects fair and such as a court of equity would sanction and approve. . *515 The relation which a surviving partner holds to the representative of a deceased partner has been clearly defined and is generally understood

In re Carpel

178 A.D. 146 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 18, 1917

Div. 527 ) this court said: “It is, therefore, clearly established that at the time the respondent applied for admission to the bar he was not legally qualified, and that his lack of qualification was covered up and concealed … Obviously it was invalid because he was not properly qualified to apply for admission. It follows that his admission must be revoked and it is so ordered.” In Matter of Pritchett ( 122 App.

Applewhite v. Accuhealth, Inc.

81 A.D.3d 94 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 28, 2010

It is basic that the party moving for summary judgment has the burden of establishing the absence of any factual issues to entitle it to judgment as a matter of law. … This statement is clearly insufficient to shift any burden to plaintiffs.

AT&T Information Systems, Inc. v. Donohue

113 A.D.2d 395 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 19, 1985

Clearly, no such assessment was made here. … The Board cannot be expected to operate in a vacuum, and its members are not immune from trends and experiences. Nonetheless, policy decisions remain the responsibility of the Board.

VIP Pet Grooming Studio, Inc. v. Sproule

2024 NY Slip Op 00205 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 17, 2024

When we picked him up, he was clearly in distress, and we rushed him to the emergency vet. He had water in his lungs that the vet said could only have come from a dramatic physical accident at the groomer. … merits of the action, as otherwise required under other provisions of CPLR 3211, but rather, need only establish that the true nature of the action is one within the scope of anti-SLAPP.

McAfee v. Dix

101 A.D. 69 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1905

contract was never qualified. … If' it was not qualified or altered, then the defendant must pay the contract price.

National Life Ass'n v. Thompson

38 A.D. 445 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1899

This ruling was clearly erroneous. … It was admitted that Freeman was' an officer of the plaintiff corporation, and the defendant was not only entitled to contradict or qualify his testimony as to the particular conversations which Freeman had mentioned, but

People v. Ohrenstein, Babbush, Sanzillo & Montalto

153 A.D.2d 342 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 21, 1989

As already noted, the Speech or Debate Clause immunizes legislators only to the extent that proof of a legislative act is necessary to establish, on the People’s direct case, that the defendant committed the crimes charged … Since the Speech or Debate Clause was intended only to protect legislators against unwarranted intrusions into the legislative process, not to provide immunity for conduct clearly unrelated to that process, the dismissed

Van Nostrand v. Froehlich

44 A.D.3d 54 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 17, 2007

This Court specifically held that the extent of plaintiffs’ injuries, and whether such injuries qualify as serious under the Insurance Law, “should generally be left for the damages phase of the trial” (id. at 742). … The courts were responsible for vetting serious injury automobile cases by application of basic summary judgment principles to avoid unnecessary jury trials where the injury is clearly minor (see Zecca v Riccardelli, supra

People ex rel. Stabile v. Warden of the City Prison

139 A.D. 488 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 7, 1910

It does not' affect the question of jurisdiction, and where-a court has jurisdiction, it is within its power and authority, and is clearly its duty, to entertain, hear, and determine every question that may possibly or legitimately … In' other- words, a constitutional immunity of the defendant was violated by the second trial and judgment.

Occidental Chemical Corp. v. Public Service Commission

114 A.D.2d 149 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 20, 1986

Finally, of direct pertinence to the instant case, for facilities "developed on or after June twenty-six, nineteen hundred eighty”, the PSC was directed to establish a minimum price of 6 cents per kilowatt hour for mandatory … Thus, this and other expressions of legislative purpose already discussed indicate clearly that the intent was to enhance the fruition of available, productive alternate energy resources, not merely to enhance their commencement