Case law

African Diaspora Maritime Corp. v. Golden Gate Yacht Club

109 A.D.3d 204 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 25, 2013

These provisions clearly make reference, and pertain, to Defender Candidates (and Challenger Candidates) as competitors. … own best interests, which would not be served by rejecting qualified candidates.

Tonnele v. Wetmore

124 A.D. 686 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 13, 1908

Such is clearly the conclusion from the reasoning in Downey v. Seib (185 N. Y. 427 ). In Monarque v. Monarque ( 80 N. Y. 320 ) the judgment invoked as a bar was entered upon, consent, and in McArthur v. Scott ( 113 U. … The only qualifying- trustee had died and the trust was without a trastee. The testator left real property apparently affected by the trust.

Congregation Beth Israel West Side Jewish Center v. Board of Estimate

285 A.D. 629 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 12, 1955

Y. 468 ), and this rule has long been established by decisions of this court. ’ ’ Plaintiff made no effort to combat the' presumption thus raised. … The hearings before the planning commission and the board of estimate indicate clearly that the amendment was intended to be city-wide in scope and of general applicability.

Scheider v. American Bridge Co.

79 N.Y.S. 634 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 9, 1903

If, therefore, it wound it around without protection, it was clearly a negligent act. … The evidence disclosed that Wright was qualified to speak with respect to the construction, supports, and operation of derricks. He had 40 years’ experience in this country and in Scotland.

Young v. City of Rochester

73 A.D. 81 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1902

The principles laid down in such cases are too well established to permit of dispute or even, doubt. They are conceded by the plaintiff in this case. … If it had, clearly it would have attempted to give a bonus or gratuity and would have been void.

Immuno AG v. Moor-Jankowski

145 A.D.2d 114 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 17, 1989

Although opinion enjoys absolute constitutional immunity, statements of a factual sort do not. … Before knowing falsity or reckless disregard for truth can be established, the plaintiff must establish that the statement was, in fact, false.” (Rinaldi v Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 42 NY2d 369, 380 , supra.)

People v. Lainfiesta

258 A.D.2d 412 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 12, 1999

This guarantee encompasses a qualified right to be represented by counsel of one’s own choosing (P eople v Arroyave, 49 NY2d 264, 270-271 ; People v Childs, 247 AD2d 319, 325 , lv denied 92 NY2d 849 ; see also, Chandler v … She clearly remembered this incident, because the deceased had interrupted the sale and informed the buyer that defendant was not working for him.

People v. Elliott

155 A.D. 486 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 7, 1913

The attempt of the defense was to establish by cross-examination that this story was concocted for the purpose of ameliorating the punishment that Errico was to receive, or perhaps to secure for him entire immunity by putting … The appellant makes a point on the admission of that letter, but Errico qualified fully as to knowledge of his handwriting.

People ex rel. Snyder v. Hylan

163 A.D. 219 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 12, 1914

It is conceded that on March 21, 1914, the Governor intended and attempted to appoint each of the defendants to the office of county judge of Kings, county, and that the defendants intended and attempted fully to-qualify, … When the purpose of the People is clearly evidenced by plain words, precisely arranged, that purpose must be given effect.

Pappas v. Tzolis

87 A.D.3d 889 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 15, 2011

Based on this theory, Tzolis argued that all of his dealings with Extell were immune from claims for breach of fiduciary duty. … As the movant on this pre-answer motion to dismiss, Tzolis had the burden of “clearly” establishing that paragraph 11 of the operating agreement eliminated the particular fiduciary duty that plaintiffs contend he breached

Smiley Steel Co. v. Schmoll

200 A.D. 655 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 7, 1922

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 … The plaintiffs clearly had no title to the goods that they could pass. The court correctly directed a verdict for the defendant on this cause of action.”

Continental Casualty Co. v. Rapid-American Corp.

177 A.D.2d 61 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 25, 1992

Those allegations, if established at trial, could provide the basis for an award of punitive damages. … Under this analysis by the Court of Appeals, the disclaimer asserted by CNA clearly fails.

Hazen v. Hill Betts & Nash, LLP

92 A.D.3d 162 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 5, 2012

The other HBN attorney did not attempt to charge clients for his personal expenses and paid the money back over time; therefore, his conduct is clearly distinguishable from the petitioner’s, which essentially amounted to … Well-established precedent demonstrates that the New York State Human Rights Law “does not immunize disabled employees from discipline or discharge for incidents of misconduct in the workplace.”

In re the Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on the Museum of Modern Art

253 A.D.2d 211 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 16, 1999

Clearly the intent of the legislation was to protect works of fine art from being seized by local creditors in a civil proceeding. … that section 12.03 does not apply to a subpoena duces tecum issued as part of a criminal investigation, it is unnecessary to reach the issue of whether such statute is preempted by Federal law, specifically the Federal Immunity

White Corbin & Co. v. Jones

45 A.D. 241 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1899

. * * * If there is an overvaluation so substantial in amount that, either in connection with proof of the intention or from the facts upon which the intention may be clearly found, it is evident that there was an intent … Y. 225 ) it was said: “The actual value of. the .property is an important item of evidence, and, with other.circupistances,..may- be sufficient to' establish fraud.” In Douglass v. Ireland ( 73 N.

Pugh v. Desantis

37 A.D.3d 1026 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 22, 2007

A report authored by an orthopedic surgeon who examined plaintiff four months later—in May 2003—opined that plaintiff’s complaints “are clearly an aggravation of a pre-existing symptomatic condition related to [a] 1986 motor … With respect to establishing a current injury, Merrihew relied upon plaintiffs X rays which, in his opinion and that of Sellig, showed “some straightening” of the cervical spine.

MCCULLOUGH, JAMELL R., PEOPLE v

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 27, 2015

Those factors are clearly relevant to the eyewitness’s identification of defendant (see Abney, 13 NY3d at 268). … Finally, we agree with defendant that Franklin is a qualified expert on eyewitness identifications (see People v Norstrand, 35 Misc 3d 367, 372; Abney, 31 Misc 3d 1231[A], *9-13, 2011 NY Slip Op 50919[U], on remand from 13

Piroozian v. Homapour

2022 NY Slip Op 06150 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 2, 2022

"Judicial records, as well as documents reflecting out-of-court transactions such as mortgages, deeds, contracts, and any other papers, the contents of which are essentially undeniable, would qualify as documentary evidence … The agreement unambiguously provided procedures for Piroozian to purchase the "Property," a term which was clearly defined, whereas Piroozian's term sheet purported to set forth terms for Piroozian's purchase of the entire

Dewine v. State of New York Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders

89 A.D.3d 88 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 30, 2011

As the court properly concluded and petitioner correctly concedes, however, the crimes of which petitioner was convicted in Wyoming qualify as sex offenses in New York under the “essential elements” provision of Correction … Individuals such as petitioner who were serving a sentence or on parole or probation in another state at the time of SORA’s implementation are clearly no less dangerous than similarly situated individuals in New York. in

Matter of County of Nassau v. Nassau County Sheriff's Corr. Officers' Benevolent Assn.

2024 NY Slip Op 00069 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 10, 2024

"An arbitration award may be vacated if it violates a strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation of the arbitrator's power" ( Matter of County of Nassau v Civil Serv. … The arbitrator's decision to award the claimants a designation that their injuries or illnesses qualified for statutory benefits was therefore irrational, considering that there was no proof that any such benefits were required