Case law

People v. Santiago

51 A.D.2d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 31, 1975

People v Kerr, 43 AD2d 895 ); nevertheless, it is also the fact that the eligible youth cannot claim youthful offender status simply because he is within the qualified age group. … In Drummond’s case the record shows clearly that the plea was made by her in contemplation of a sentence to an indeterminate term of imprisonment having a maximum of 12 years.

Mertsaris v. 73rd Corp.

105 A.D.2d 67 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 17, 1984

Although qualified to insert an endotracheal tube, Dr. … The evidence at trial established that Dr.

Board of Visitors - Marcy Psychiatric Center v. Coughlin

96 A.D.2d 760 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 11, 1983

Subdivision (b) of section 7.11 reads as follows: “(b) The *761 commissioner shall control the organization of the office and may continue, establish, discontinue, expand, and contract facilities under his jurisdiction. … It is undisputed that the proposed conversion qualifies as a Type I action under 6 NYCRR 617.2 (z).

People ex rel. Broderick v. Goldfogle

213 A.D. 677 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 6, 1925

Chapman (173 id. 205, 219) further said (at p. 641): “No decision of this court to which our attention is called has qualified that rule, or construed § 5219 as leaving out of consideration the rate of State taxation imposed … Numerous and familiar decisions of this Court establish that they have a wide range of discretion in that regard.

I.M. v. City of New York

2019 NY Slip Op 7756 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 29, 2019

To establish a prima facie violation under the ADA and the RA, a plaintiff must show that "(1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that the defendants are subject to one of the [statutes]; and (3) that she … J.L. clearly has no bearing on the present case. The majority also relies on R.B. ex rel.

Matter of Goncalves

2018 NY Slip Op 3424 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 10, 2018

It is well-established that "[a]n attorney convicted of a felony in [a foreign jurisdiction that is] essentially similar to a New York felony is automatically disbarred" ( Matter of Park , 95 AD3d 1648 , 1648 [2012]; see … Here, respondent's conviction resulted from her intentional appropriation of client funds that significantly exceeded $1,000, and her actions would clearly constitute a felony in New York ( see RI Gen Laws Ann § 11-41-11.1

Clapp v. Byrnes

3 A.D. 284 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1896

Y. 250 .) ■ This rule is made imperative upon jüdióial tribunals and cannot be evaded where the intention of the grantor is made clearly apparent- by the language of the-conveyance. (Coleman v. Beach, 97 N. … to have it judicially established.

In re the Probate of the Will of Schindhelm

11 A.D.2d 777 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 5, 1960

Petitioner has been appointed and has qualified as temporary administratrix. … The present facts are distinguishable from those in cases where it appeared clearly, before or after trial, that the Public Administrator would be entitled to letters of administration (ef.

Healy v. Empire Trust Co.

276 A.D.2d 305 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 16, 1950

The will established three trusts, each for the benefit of a named niece of the testator, and provided for a distribution of principal upon the death of the second niece to die and again upon the death of the third niece, … Clearly the remainders would be vested were there no words of qualification on the designation. We are called upon to decide what the testator meant by the addendum “ or the survivor of them ”.

Perutz v. Bohemian Discount Bank in Liquidation

279 A.D. 386 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 13, 1952

All relevant facts were stipulated to by both parties in a written stipulation submitted to the trial court, and Doctor Paul Hartmann who testified as a qualified expert on Czechoslovakian law was, also by stipulation, called … It clearly follows that foreign regulations are not to be given greater effect.

People v. Foster

200 A.D.2d 196 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 21, 1994

I make no judgment on that, but I find that there was clearly a sufficient basis from the testimony of both of those witnesses to permit them to testify in court and to make an in-court identification based on their ability … While the court may have purported to make an independent source finding, it is manifest that no such finding was made, at least none which could qualify as such under the law.

People v. Russell

197 A.D. 239 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 10, 1921

In answer to a question as to what time he had left the dance hall, he said he did not know, “ I had no watch,” which he qualified by “ I didn’t look at the watch.” … The evidence was hearsay, clearly improper and incompetent.

May v. Schlesinger

55 N.Y.S. 514 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 13, 1899

Schlesinger died in May, 1869; and, in November of that year, his will was duly admitted to probate by the surrogate of the county of New York, and letters testamentary thereon were issued to Lewis May and Julius Epstein, who qualified … Unless, therefore, something has happened to prevent the running of the statute, this proceeding is clearly barred.

Nornew, Inc. v. Marsh

301 A.D.2d 206 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 2002

judgment, seeking a determination as a matter of law that the steel pipeline is, as defined by RPTL 590 (2), part of an “economic unit” associated with the extraction and sale of natural gas from petitioner’s wells and thus is immune … This concept, which is essential to the equitable administration of Title 5, is now clearly reflected in [the amendments].”

People v. Samuels

12 A.D.3d 695 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 29, 2004

The Court of Appeals has observed that this section establishes a “high test” to qualify for the “exceptional remedy” of dismissal of an indictment (see People v Darby, 75 NY2d 449, 455 [1990]). … Indeed, given the questions posed by the grand jury, this was clearly the focus of their attention.

In re Buffalo Traction Co.

25 A.D. 447 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 15, 1898

Y. 588 ), and, therefore, if it had, in fact, failed to. fulfill any of the conditions imposed upon it by the act. of 1896,. the contestants are clearly correct in their contention. … With the last proposition established in the manner indicated, we think it follows, as a necessary corollary, that the act of 1896 does not fall within the constitutional inhibition of section 16, article 3,. which provides

National Psychological Ass'n for Psychoanalysis, Inc. v. Allen

14 A.D.2d 190 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 1, 1961

The major portion of plaintiffs’ affidavits, as well as their complaint, is devoted to the merits of NPAP’s training program, and why it should qualify as a ‘ substantial equivalent ’ of ‘ the specialized advanced courses … psychoanalytic point of view in psychology. ’ ’ Upon submission to the Commissioner, he refused to give his approval, stating with reference to the above-quoted language as follows: " It now appears that what is proposed is clearly

Pace v. Ogden Services Corp.

258 A.D.2d 101 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 17, 1999

The record clearly shows, and the parties do not dispute, that plaintiff engaged in a protected activity and that Ogden was aware that she had done so. … complaint of harassment and her dismissal does not of itself support an *105 inference of retaliation (compare, Dortz v City of New York, supra, at 157), plaintiff also contends that her subordinate, a male who was less qualified

In re State Division of Human Rights

118 A.D.2d 3 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 17, 1986

The court indicated (at p 654): "It seems reasonable that a qualifying physical examination would take into consideration the effect of an existing degenerative disease and the possibility of its rendering the applicant unable … Repeal by implication is highly disfavored (Cimo v State of New York, 306 NY 143, 148 [1953]), and it is unnecessary for us to consider the issue where, as here, the statutes are not clearly repugnant.

Daily Gazette Co. v. City of Schenectady

242 A.D.2d 164 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 4, 1998

Clearly, the purpose of the information request in Prisoners’ Legal Servs. was potentially adversarial or litigious in nature. … Accordingly, *170 respondents have failed to demonstrate that the information requested by petitioners comes squarely within the Civil Rights Law § 50-a FOIL exemption because they have not established, in any convincing