Case law

In re the Estate of Tomeck

29 A.D.3d 156 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 9, 2006

The “threat” of legal process was clearly present in that, unless decedent accepted that transfer, she was forced to execute the spousal refusal to support herself and, as a result, her estate has been subject to this litigation … (Matter of Conroy, 201 AD2d 855, 855 [1994]), and in light of our holding that no implied contract arose at the time that decedent executed the spousal refusal or at any point thereafter, we find that respondent has not established

Huerta v. New York City Transit Authority

290 A.D.2d 33 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 11, 2001

Finally, on this point, both this Department and the Second Department have flatly rejected the Transit Authority’s claim that it is immune from the City’s regulatory safety standards. (D’Arpa v New York City Tr. … The statute’s language clearly limits the exemption to a subway or structure appurtenant to a subway, not an escalator.

People ex rel. Ordway v. St. Saviour's Sanitarium

34 A.D. 363 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1898

Annexed to. the return to the writ of habeas corpus and forming part thereof are the affidavits of two .qualified physicians. … Constitutional immunities are precisely the same as to ■each.

Adelaide Productions, Inc. v. BKN International AG

38 A.D.3d 221 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 6, 2007

Thus, the record establishes that Adelaide/ELP did not, in fact, rely on Bohbot’s statement about BKN’s cash posi *225 tion. … While BKNIAG clearly cannot be held liable for the unpaid balance of the Outstanding Obligations under this provision, it may be held liable for BKN’s other “duties, obligations and liabilities” under the Licensing Agreements

Harris v. Shearson Hayden Stone, Inc.

82 A.D.2d 87 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 9, 1981

whatever wrongs may be established. … Thus the reality is that the effect of decreeing that plaintiffs’ claims proceed by arbitration is to immunize the practice followed by Shearson from scrutiny by anyone.

Kennett v. Hopkins

58 A.D. 407 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1901

This receiver qualified and made demand upon the defendant Hopkins for the assets and securities of the firm. … The judgment, therefore, is clearly within the power of the court to grant.

In re the Arbitration between County of Columbia & Columbia County Deputy Sheriff's Benevolent Ass'n

184 A.D.2d 814 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 4, 1992

On July 31, 1990, Yannacone was advised that he had not been considered for the position because he did not qualify under the Civil Service Law. … We do not find that limitation clearly spelled out in the agreement and, therefore, conclude that the arguments in petitioners’ brief describing differences in duties and responsibilities of the various job titles irrelevant

Metzendorf v. 130 West 57 Co.

132 A.D.2d 262 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 15, 1987

The landlord established most of the aforementioned facts by documentary evidence on its motion for summary judgment. … Clearly, the tenant’s "convenience” does not qualify as a legal excuse for his failure to file tax returns from his actual residence. (Cf, Matter of Rose Assocs; v State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 121 AD2d 185.)

People ex rel. Lynch v. Pierce

149 A.D. 286 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 2, 1912

The precise distinction between Kresser’s case and the case at bar is found in the sentence “showing clearly his intent to appoint the persons named.” … Both of these propositions must be assumed for the purpose of establishing that the nomination was equivalent to an appointment.

Rawson v. Leggett

97 A.D. 416 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 15, 1904

Clearly the defendants were not bound to inform him of their suspicions and give him an opportunity to escape. (Kutner v. Fargo, supra, 322 .) … , malicious and oppressive public prosecutions, and as •one of the ancient immunities and privileges of' English liberty,” and while the action of the grand jury in finding that there- was probable cause may not be conclusive

Matter of AEJ 534 E. 88th, LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal

194 A.D.3d 464 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 11, 2021

AEJ's argument, that the 2005 lease qualifies as a rent-stabilized lease was properly rejected by the DHCR. The argument is defeated by the very terms of the lease and its riders. … It clearly provides that it is a "Standard Form of Apartment Lease for Apartments not Subject to the Rent-stabilization Law."

People v. Lainfiesta

257 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.

Brook v. Peconic Bay Med. Ctr.

2019 NY Slip Op 3552 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 7, 2019

evidence that was apparently not available at the time of the prior motion to dismiss, the evidence does not alter this Court's prior conclusion that plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege malice to overcome the applicable qualified … Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend to add new claims for negligence and gross negligence was properly denied because these claims are clearly devoid of merit ( see CPLR 3025[b]; MBIA Ins.

People ex rel. Goldenkoff v. Albany Law School

198 A.D. 460 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 16, 1921

Bellevue Hospital ( 60 Hun, 107 ) a medical student, who had finished a prescribed course of study, was refused permission by his college to take the final examinations which might qualify him for a degree. … Clearly, therefore, the faculty acted within the scope of its jurisdiction, and exercised its discretion in a matter involving discretion, to such purpose that no review thereof may be made by a court.

Brewer v. Board of Education of Plainview-Old Bethpage Central School District

69 A.D.2d 377 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 6, 1979

Her appointment was within the general secondary tenure area, as at that time the school district had not yet established separate junior high school and senior high school tenure areas. … By September 1, 1961, when Griffith acquired tenure, the district had established separate junior and senior high school tenure areas.

McHugh v. Jones

258 A.D. 111 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 27, 1939

Lloyd — knew the defendant and that the former was acquainted with defendant’s wife, and, having concealed this fact upon their voir dire examination, they were not qualified to act as jurors. … Accepting the above statements in the moving affidavits as true, they clearly indicate that Mrs.

Sitts v. Waiontha Knitting Co.

94 A.D. 38 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 15, 1904

Having become faint in the course of her work she went to a window to revive, then came back and again became faint and dizzy, “ things turned black,” and in some manner which is not clearly disclosed her left hand was caught … They also establish to our mind that, plaintiff, under the circumstances in this case, although an infant, was qualified to assume such risk. Neither is there anything in the principles laid down in the case of Dowd v.

Claim of Sullivan v. Hudson Navigation Co.

182 A.D. 152 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 7, 1918

The rule is well established that “ when a party interposes the judgment of a court as the foundation of his title or claim, the want of jurisdiction in the court to render the judgment may always be set up against it when … It is not the particular kind of work which the person is qualified to perform, or the fact that he is performing a particular kind of work, which determines the exclusive jurisdiction of a court of admiralty; it is the character

Langan v. State Farm Fire & Casualty

48 A.D.3d 76 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 27, 2007

Clearly, the term “remarriage” assumes that the surviving spouse was previously a party to a marriage. … The Second Department dismissed *78 that action, finding that claimant did not have standing because he does not qualify as a surviving spouse under the EPTL (Langan v St.

O'Rourke v. Cunard Steamship Co.

169 A.D. 943 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 15, 1915

Neither under the common law of England is defendant immune from the consequences of tHe acts of the ship’s surgeon, if plaintiff’s recital thereof is true. … If this rule of English procedure is not qualified "by the later decision of the House of Lords in Addis v. Gramophone Co., Limited (supra), it cannot aid plaintiff in the case at bar.