Case law

Buck v. Cimino

243 A.D.2d 681 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 27, 1997

However, we disagree that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of entitlement to a broker’s commission. … Although it is not disputed that the plaintiff was not involved in any of the negotiations that led to the sale, a broker, in order to qualify for a commission, need not necessarily have been involved in the ensuing negotiations

7 Vestry LLC v. Department of Finance

22 A.D.3d 174 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 25, 2005

completion of the approved work and confirmation thereof by the filing of a complete application, including submission of a “certificate of completion” (19 RCNY 14-41 [g] [4]), is the project granted final or permanent benefits, established … The amount of the payment due, $6,046.50, was clearly indicated on the bill as “ICIP DEFERRED.” By tax year 2001/2002, the four lots on the subject property were merged into a single “parent” lot, number 21.

Matter of Zamostina v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys.

138 N.Y.S.3d 637 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 16, 2020

However, under the extraordinary circumstances of this case, we conclude that the petitioners succeeded in establishing that the appellant should be estopped from collecting additional funds resulting from their placement … Moreover, "[t]he doctrine of estoppel will not reach so far as to hold an individual eligible for vested retirement where by statute, [she] clearly does not qualify for such eligibility" ( Matter of Galanthay [*3]v New York

People v. Demagall

114 A.D.3d 189 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 9, 2014

Following the People’s undisputed establishment of the elements of second degree murder, the trial moved to defendant’s affirmative defense of insanity (see Penal Law § 40.15). … The jury was presented with the testimony of four well-qualified experts, who were extensively examined and cross-examined.

McMurray v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

135 A.D.2d 235 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 18, 1988

Our disagreement with our dissenting brother revolves around the fact that subsequent to the entry of the judgment from which this appeal is taken, the tenant accumulated the requisite 20 years of occupancy to qualify him … Moreover, the statute is clearly remedial in nature. (Matter of Lavalle v Scruggs-Leftwich, supra, 133 AD2d, at 315 .)

People v. Lee

116 A.D.3d 493 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 10, 2014

When discussing how to respond to the notes, defense counsel urged the court to respond to the notes together because the *495 jury was clearly “struggling with the idea of intent in the assault charge.” … The Court clarified the rule: “nonwillful, negligent loss or destruction of Rosario material does not mandate a sanction unless the defendant establishes prejudice” (id. at 567).

Reynolds v. Ætna Life Insurance

28 A.D. 591 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1898

On the Jth day of October, 1894, the said Richard Worthington died intestate, and the defendant Margaret Worthington was duly appointed, and has qualified, as his administratrix. After the death of Mr. … from asserting its claims against him as receiver by reason of its interpleader action, coolly asks that the judgment of the court below in favor of the plaintiff and against the insurance company be affirmed. “ It is a clearly-established

Margolis v. New York City Transit Authority

157 A.D.2d 238 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 15, 1990

Forty-two train-masters qualified for the new superintendent or deputy superintendent title, but petitioner did not. … Clearly, petitioner is entitled to this information in order adequately to prepare for trial.

Gilbane Bldg. Co./TDX Constr. Corp. v. St. Paul Fire & Mar. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 15, 2016

Supreme Court denied Liberty's motion, holding that plaintiffs qualified as additional insureds under the policy. … Even under that reading, however, the record establishes that Samson complied with its terms and that Gilbane is entitled to coverage.

Gomez v. Brill Securities, Inc.

95 A.D.3d 32 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 15, 2012

Insofar as, here, the agreement to arbitrate, by its very terms, clearly precludes arbitration when arbitrable claims are brought as a class action, plaintiffs cannot be required to arbitrate their class action claims. … Moreover, whether the claims here qualify for class certification is an argument notably absent from any of the briefs submitted on appeal and we should therefore refrain from proffering any opinion on this issue (Misicki

Cushman v. Amend

176 A.D. 224 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 26, 1917

O’Neill immediately retransferred to the company stock of the par value of $150,000 to be used as treasury stock, and transferred three shares to each of several gentlemen, including plaintiff, so as to qualify them to act … The entries were not used to establish any fact pertinent to the relations of plaintiff to the company, but to establish an extrinsic fact, to wit, that plaintiff employed O’Neill to sell his stock, or stock in which he was

Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Wilds

184 A.D. 435 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 11, 1918

William Wheeler Smith died April 5, 1908, leaving a will and codicil which were duly admitted to probate on June 10, 1908, and executors were duly appointed and qualified, and the complaint alleges that they are now acting … This is clearly unfounded, as this is not an action to recover on the supposed liability of Catherine H. B.

Fairbank Farms, Inc. v. Kasza

69 A.D.2d 1001 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 13, 1979

No division of the government is immune from scrutiny. … A clear and concise case has been established herein estopping *1004 the State from imposing any sales tax against Fairbank Farms, Inc., retrospectively.

People v. Hightower

186 A.D.3d 926 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 13, 2020

"[I]t is well established that the odor of marihuana emanating from a vehicle, when detected by an officer qualified by training and experience to recognize it, is sufficient to constitute probable cause to search a vehicle … Jurisdiction is established when "conduct occurred within such county sufficient to establish an element of such offense" (CPL 20.40 [1] [a]).

Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Service Commission

63 A.D.2d 364 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 27, 1978

Since the PSC’s authority to issue the order and the necessity for doing so have been established, it is only a serious infringement of petitioner’s constitutional rights that would warrant our annulment of the order. … Further the order clearly contemplates expenditures that would qualify under account 426.4 of the PSC’s accounting guidelines (16 NYCRR ch 3, subch F) as expenditures to influence public opinion.

People v. Paniagua

45 A.D.3d 98 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 6, 2007

The People’s proof, set forth in their response to the resentencing petition, which went unchallenged, established the pertinent *107 facts showing these infractions. … These violations qualify as “serious disciplinary infractions” under section 803 (1) (d).

Schieffelin v. Goldsmith

227 A.D. 246 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 12, 1929

Having in view the rule that the legislative power is unlimited, except as restrained by the Constitution, and that every act of the Legislature is presumed to be in harmony with the Constitution, unless the contrary clearly … The method of certifying disability is a matter for the legislative control; and, if a certificate of a medical board of disability ought to be required, before the president-justice is qualified to determine the disability

Sackets Harbor Central School District v. Munoz

283 A.D.2d 756 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 10, 2001

Rather, only subsequent to the meeting was it commented at the Federal level that it was “inappropriate” to establish an IEP by voting (see, 34 CFR part 300, Appendix A) and only subsequent to the meeting was it established … Neither State nor Federal law, however, requires such persons to be affiliated with a school district to qualify as a member of an IEP team.

New York Trust Co. v. American Realty Co.

215 A.D. 416 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 5, 1926

But so long as he retains the benefits of the dealing, he cannot claim immunity, on the ground that the fraud was committed by his agent and not by himself. … If the counterclaim is established, it would defeat the plaintiff’s claim. The counterclaim was properly pleaded. (Code of Civil Proc. sec. 501; Isham v. Davidson, 52 N. Y. 237 ; Vandervort v. Mink, 113 App.

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of Wiley

111 A.D. 590 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 9, 1906

Such-is the mandate of the statute, and that principle is so-firmly established by the decisions of this and of her -courts as to render any citation of authorities needless.” … He, therefore,,- clearly had in mind, so far -as the specific, bequests and. the annuities were concerned, the possibility of the death of said beneficiaries, both- before his own decease and also , thereafter and before