Case law

World Trade Knitting Mills, Inc. v. Lido Knitting Mills, Inc.

154 A.D.2d 99 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 20, 1990

Since, Honeywell contends, its duty of care was imposed by contract, rather than by law, it should be held immune from tort liability to the plaintiffs pursuant to the general rule that "failure to perform [a contract] at … (supra), which held that a complaint asserting that an alarm company had failed to properly perform its duty to inspect and maintain a fire alarm system clearly alleged mere nonfeasance, and the court rejected the argument

Williams v. New York City Transit Authority

108 A.D.3d 403 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 2013

Though not qualified as an expert, Careccia offered conclusions and opinions based on both his common sense and Transit Authority operating criteria, which he conceded “are much higher than anyone else’s, so I would look … The admission of testimony that holds a defendant to a higher standard of care than required by common law is clearly erroneous ( see Crosland v New York City Tr.

Williams v. New York City Transit Authority

108 A.D.3d 403 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 2013

Though not qualified as an expert, Careccia offered conclusions and opinions based on both his common sense and Transit Authority operating criteria, which he conceded “are much higher than anyone else’s, so I would look … The admission of testimony that holds a defendant to a higher standard of care than required by common law is clearly erroneous ( see Crosland v New York City Tr.

Midorimatsu, Inc. v. Hui Fat Co.

99 A.D.3d 680 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 3, 2012

A CPLR 3211 (a) (1) motion may be granted “only where the documentary evidence ut *682 terly refutes plaintiff’s factual allegations, conclusively establishing a defense as a matter of law” (Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. … Materials that clearly qualify as “documentary evidence” include “documents reflecting out-of-court transactions such as mortgages, deeds, contracts, and any other papers, the contents of which are ‘essentially undeniable

In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of Wilkin

90 A.D. 324 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1904

Section 2818 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it existed prior to 1903, made no provision for a case where, as here, one of two or more testamentary trustees renounced and failed to qualify. … Clearly not. Why was she determined to take such action % Was it the outgrowth of her bitter feeling of animosity towards her sister-in-law, Mrs. Cunningham ?

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

Warberg Opportunistic Trading Fund L.P. v. GeoResources, Inc.

151 A.D.3d 465 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 8, 2017

We found that “the ‘notwithstanding’ provision in section 8 (h) clearly overrides any conflicting provisions in section 8 (f),” even though “it renders the adjustment formula in section 8 (f) impotent” (id. at 83). … Based on the plain language of the purchase agreements to which Warberg and OOC were parties, any reformation claim that the original purchasers held was assigned to them, since it qualifies as one of the “rights and benefits

Gem-Quality Corp. v. Colony Ins. Co.

2022 NY Slip Op 05994 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 26, 2022

The subject policy, which qualifies as documentary evidence, provides coverage, among other things, for damages because of "bodily injury." … The endorsement only expressly and clearly excludes coverage for damages for bodily [*3]injury sought by way of a direct claim by the injured party against the insured.

Barrett v. Barrett

281 A.D.2d 799 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 15, 2001

Petitioner’s testimony established that Ryan’s needs have substantially increased, as have the household expenses, and that she cannot adequately meet these needs. … Even if respondent’s contribution to the costs of the education of Robert were to qualify as support of other children within the meaning of factor (8), said factor applies “only if the resources available to support such

Miriam Osborn Memorial Home Ass'n v. Assessor of City of Rye

80 A.D.3d 118 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 12, 2010

The overwhelming evidence established that admission to the Osborn is restricted to wealthy and relatively healthy senior citizens. … As the appraisal report of the Osborn’s expert clearly reflects, the livable square footage of the Osborn was increased following the completion of the phase-two construction.

People v. Fragassi

2019 NY Slip Op 8740 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 5, 2019

The testimony at trial established that, while on routine patrol, Christopher Holland, a deputy sheriff, observed a vehicle make multiple turns without signaling. … A court's determination that a defendant was not in custody is accorded great weight and will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous" ( People v Wager , 173 AD3d 1352 [2019] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted

Ruberti, Girvin & Ferlazzo, P. C. v. New York State Division of State Police

218 A.D.2d 494 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 18, 1996

Supreme Court denied petitioner’s request insofar as it pertained to the troop, zone and station assignments of respondent’s sworn members, reasoning that respondent had established that the release of such information could … In this regard, it cannot seriously be argued that the test scores at issue, as well as any personnel or discrimination complaints filed against respondent’s members, fail to qualify as "personnel records” within the meaning

Moser v. Devine Real Estate, Inc.

42 A.D.3d 731 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 12, 2007

Although the parties are bound by this finding, we find that Supreme Court clearly left open the question of whether a fiduciary relationship nevertheless subsequently evolved between 1998 and 2003; indeed, the court pointed … Plaintiff met his prima facie burden as the movant for summary judgment by alleging that none of the information identified by defendants—not customer information nor the terms of the proposal proffered by defendants to Morgan—qualifies

Choate v. City of Buffalo

39 A.D. 379 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1899

The nature and extent of the-power conferred, as well as the duty imposed as a condition of its-exercise, are clearly indicated in the language of the act; and the-reference to another statute, which is the city charter, … In other words, the statute referred to did not affect or qualify the substance of the later legislation, but it simply regulated and specified the details of its administration.

In re the Estate of Etoll

30 A.D.2d 224 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 28, 1968

By proof adduced in large part from proponent’s witnesses and meeting with little contradiction, if any, it was clearly established not merely that decedent was insane, with infrequent and very brief periods of lucidity, … Etoll.’ ” *227 Although Father Korkemaz was proponent’s principal witness, and his testimony must he deemed the only really substantial evidence supportive of the proponent’s case, he invariably qualified his opinion of decedent

Shattuck v. Laing

124 A.D.3d 1016 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 2015

In this version, created only a few months after the disputed deed, the phrase “more or less” clearly references the amount of acreage conveyed and not the location of the western property line, which is identified without … Notably, these rules of construction were well established before the disputed deeds were drafted (see e.g. Wendell v People, 8 Wend 183, 189-190 [1831]; Doe v Thompson, 5 Cow 371, 373-374 [1826].)

Glick Construction Corp. v. New York State Tax Commission

95 A.D.2d 129 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 4, 1983

Title to the project was held by BTI in order to qualify for New York State Housing Finance Agency (HFA) financing (see Private Housing Finance Law, art III). … The purpose of BTI is well established and is indicative of a unity of purpose of these two corporations. BTI was Glick’s nominee and Glick controlled BTI completely.

Matter of Harrison Orthodox Minyan, Inc. v. Town/Village of Harrison

2025 NY Slip Op 01634 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 19, 2025

Since the caretaker's "full-time job [wa]s to maintain the premises during the summer months and to keep the property secure during the remaining months of the year," the Court reasoned that "the use of the residence [wa]s clearly … In reaching its decision, the Court noted that the theater corporation, "[i]n order to hire qualified actors and staff, . . . recruit[ed] candidates from around the country" and "traditionally provided housing for many of

People ex rel. Cumisky v. Wurster

14 A.D. 556 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 15, 1897

Although the statute does not in direct terms provide by whom licenses shall be granted, it clearly contemplates that they will be granted by the mayor, as is seen by reference to the provision that the city clerk shall “ … There is no express reference to any licenses in section 13 of title 2 of the charter, and although power is given to the common council in that section to make, establish, alter, modify, amend!

Koch v. Dyson

85 A.D.2d 346 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 23, 1982

Since the legislative intent was to create an all-encompassing procedure, there is clearly something wrong with this interpretation. … Clearly this legislation reflects an effort to establish a rational balance between a program geared to best utilize the State’s resources in providing a sufficient and economical source of electricity and the need to insure