Case law

Logan v. Greenwich Trust Co.

144 A.D. 372 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 1911

Greenwich, in the State of Connecticut, where he resided, and on the 14th of January, 1910, the defendant the Greenwich Trust Company of Greenwich, Conn., was appointed administrator of the property of the deceased, and duly qualified … That such is the nature of this proceeding in this-latter class of cases is clearly evinced by two weU-established propositions: First, the judgment of the court, though in form a personal judgment against the defendant,

Chapman v. Dick

197 A.D. 551 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 13, 1921

The latter contention is, in my opinion, clearly unsound and requires no further consideration. The matter complained of, in my opinion, clearly charges a crime, and unless privileged, is libelous. … Clearly it seems to me that upon such a motion it would have been both material and pertinent.

People v. Schenandoah

10 A.D.2d 342 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 27, 1960

It was highly important, therefore, that the rules applicable to this alleged confession should have been clearly enunciated by the Trial Judge. … “It has significance only insofar as it lends to the establishment of the statutory grounds for exclusion.” (People v. Spano, 4 N Y 2d 256, 261.)

People v. Somme

120 A.D. 20 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 7, 1907

an invitation to the public to some to him for medical treatment, and clearly convey the impression that he was a legal practitioner of medicine or some of its branches. … medical examiners of the State of New York) an official report that an applicant has successfully passed the examinations and is recommended for license, the'Regents shall issue to him if in their judgment lie is .duly qualified

Stutzbach v. Coler

70 N.Y.S. 901 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 14, 1901

.- Such is the established rule of law if an issue is thus raised. … The preference given in appointment clearly involves a right over all other persons entitled thereto not similarly situated.

In re Robinson

140 A.D. 329 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 21, 1910

The respondent was the director of a corporation as to the whereabouts of whose books the grand jury was investigating; his knowledge as to the affairs of the corporation of which he was a director was clearly knowledge that … The impression that they are immune from civil or criminal prosecution for their acts seems to have pervaded the community of late years, and with it has grown up a sentiment among many members of the profession that, in

Airlift International, Inc. v. State Tax Commission

52 A.D.2d 688 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 22, 1976

Additionally, the legislative memoranda submitted at the time the exemption contained in section 1105 (subd [c], par [3]) was added clearly indicate that the purpose of this provision was to preserve the ship repair industry … It has been established that the New York sales and use tax is not an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce (McGoldrick v Berwind-White Co., 309 US 33 ; see, also, McGoldrick v Felt & Tarrant Co., 309 US 70 ; Matter

Pirro v. Board of Trustees of the Vil. of Groton

2022 NY Slip Op 01358 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 3, 2022

Because the complaint asserted a violation of plaintiffs' own constitutional rights — which they clearly had standing to litigate — and was devoid of any implication that plaintiffs were asserting the rights of their tenants … "The essential elements of [a] cause of action [under 42 USC § 1983 ] are conduct committed by a person acting under color of state law, which deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities secured . . . by the

Liciaga v. New York City Tr. Auth.

2024 NY Slip Op 04257 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 21, 2024

The Third Department rejected this contention due to the agency's failure to establish that the employee was "qualified for such benefits" or to show "what amount [she] would receive if she were so entitled" ( id. ). … Even though individuals without a qualifying disability are not eligible for Medicare until age 65 ( see NY City Health & Hosps.

Matter of Samy F. v. Fabrizio

2019 NY Slip Op 6374 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 27, 2019

Given OCME's responsibilities for the testing, storage and sharing of DNA data, the Executive Law clearly applies to an LDIS, like OCME's. … A youthful offender could never qualify for automatic expungement from the database, because no DNA can be collected from such a youth post disposition.

Mussara v. Mega Funworks, Inc.

100 A.D.3d 185 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 10, 2012

The injured plaintiff checked the warning sign to see if his son was tall enough to qualify for the ride, but did not read the rest of the warnings. … Further, he did not collide into another rider and was not injured by hitting a barrier clearly placed to keep riders from going too far in the splash pool.

People v. Lapham

2019 NY Slip Op 3848 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 16, 2019

jurisdictionally defective where it fails to notify the defendant of the crime charged by alleging "facts supporting every element of the offense charged and the defendant's commission thereof with sufficient precision to clearly … In conjunction with the indictment, the People also filed a special information alleging that defendant was previously convicted of criminal contempt in the first degree ( see Penal Law § 215.51 [b] [iv]) — a qualifying specified

Dennis T. v. Joseph C.

82 A.D.2d 125 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 20, 1981

Since the “Irrevocable Consent” form signed by Lisa clearly indicated that the adoption proceeding would be commenced in the Queens County Surrogate’s Court, Special Term, before proceeding on the writ application, required … These ‘rights’ are not so much ‘rights’, but responsibilities which reflect the view, noted earlier, that, except when disqualified or displaced by extraordinary circumstances, parents are generally best qualified to care

Wolowitch v. National Surety Co.

152 A.D. 14 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 11, 1912

His answer, therefore, to that question was clearly false. This rejection by another company was most *22 material. … The insurance broker was clearly the agent of the plaintiff for the purpose of obtaining insurance from any company he could.

Willcox v. Erie Railroad

162 A.D. 94 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 1, 1914

From these cases it clearly appears that the validity of the contract and release is to be construed either according to the law of the State of Illinois, where they were executed, or by the law of the State of Ohio, where … Justice Hughes saying: “It is the established doctrine of *108 this court that common carriers cannot secure immunity from liability for their negligence by any sort of stipulation. [Citing cases.]

People ex rel. Lawyers' Surety Co. v. Anthony

7 A.D. 132 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1896

He duly qualified and entered upon his duties as such receiver and continued in office until he was removed by an order dated July 8,1895, under the terms of whiclrhis final accounting was directed to be had before a referee … He nowhere denies the entry-of the order or the facts claimed to be established by the order ; and we do not think that it. was the intention of the Code that interrogatories must be filed unless- the party makes an express

Velez v. VV Publishing Corp.

135 A.D.2d 47 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 28, 1988

protected editorial use of the content of the publication, New York courts have established an exemption to section 51 of the Civil Rights Law. 2 (See, e.g., Humiston v Universal Film Mfg. … Words which standing alone may reasonably be understood as defamatory may be so explained or qualified by their context as to make such an interpretation unreasonable.’ ” (Balabanoff v Hearst Consol.

Parfitt v. Ferguson

3 A.D. 176 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1896

New Utrecht was annexed to and merged in the city of Brooklyn, and it was enacted that thereafter such territory should be governed by the same laws, and should be entitled to the same rights, privileges, franchises and immunities … The opinion delivered at Special Term covers all the charges asserted by the plaintiff in this action and disposes of them clearly and satisfactorily.

Nickell v. Tracy

100 A.D. 80 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1905

We think the defendants failed to establish the first two defenses adverted to, and that evidence relating to such defenses, which was clearly incoiiipetent, was admitted over plaintiff’s objection. … The grantor conveys to the grantee all his fight, title and interest of whatsoever nature in and to the premises, and certainly if such language is not in some manner qualified or no circumstances exist from which a different

Poltorak v. Clarke

2025 NY Slip Op 04496 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 30, 2025

Determining that the Judge was entitled to absolute immunity, the Nevada district court dismissed the complaint ( see id. ). … Imposing a $1,000 forfeiture on a judge who declines to grant a writ of habeas corpus after assessing the merits of such a petition clearly infringes on the discretionary power of the judiciary.