Case law

HNC Realty Co. v. Bay View Towers Apartments, Inc.

64 A.D.2d 417 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 13, 1978

writing by lender, which contracts and subcontracts shall be in form and substance satisfactory to, and shall be approved in writing by, lender, together with surety payment bonds, issued by a surety company or companies qualified … Here, the building loan contract states very clearly that Bay View was to provide surety payment bonds "covering * * * subcontractors”. (Emphasis added.)

In re the Probate of an Instrument Purporting to be the Will of McCarthy

269 A.D. 145 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 20, 1945

McCarthy on October 7, 1941. *161 The testimony in the record establishes that Mr. … McCarthy refused to submit to the examination, which was clearly his absolute right and offers no reason for criticism. The jury reported that on October 31,1941, Mr.

McMillan v. Klaw & Erlanger Construction Co.

107 A.D. 407 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 15, 1905

But this fee is a qualified one, being held by it in trust for the public use and benefit, and that use cannot be departed from without violating an; essential condition of the contract between it and the abutting property … An attempt by the municipality to authorize a willful encroachment or construction of this character will always be condemned unless the power to sanction it is clearly shown.

People v. Cipriani

2025 NY Slip Op 06758 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 4, 2025

Although the footage does not clearly depict this person breaking the grate covering the window, the person can be seen standing in front of the window for some time before disappearing inside of the premises. … Although he does not deny that he qualifies as a persistent felony offender, he argues that County Court abused its discretion in sentencing him as such and that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh and severe, emphasizing

Del Vecchio v. Danielle Associates, LLC

108 A.D.3d 583 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 10, 2013

“The promise to indemnify should not be found unless it can be clearly implied from the language and purpose of the entire agreement and the surrounding facts and circumstances” (Roldan v New York Univ., 81 AD3d at 628 ). … In opposition, Danielle failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether *588 the injured plaintiff sustained a qualifying grave injury (see Kitkas v Windsor Place Corp., 72 AD3d at 650 ; Goodleaf v Tzivos Hashem, Inc

Phœnix v. Trustees of Columbia College

84 N.Y.S. 897 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 20, 1903

That act provided that all thé rights, privileges, and immunities theretofore vested in the college be vested in the regents of a university, who were erected into a corporation, and enabled to hold, possess, and enjoy those … The act of 1787, p. 524, c. 82, provides for the establishment of a university to be called and known as the Regents of the University of the State of New York.

People v. Serrano

71 A.D.2d 258 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 6, 1979

There would be no purpose in establishing such distinctions between the types of licenses and defining their validity, if the issuance of any type of license conferred blanket immunity from prosecution regardless of the scope … The statutory scheme created by the New York Legislature clearly demonstrates that it was the Legislature’s purpose to closely control the possession of handguns.

Watson V. City of New York

73 N.Y.S. 1027 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 10, 1902

phrases were used, it evidenced an intent from which was raised the presumption that the grant extended to the center of the highway or stream, and that, in the absence of other language contained in the deed qualifying … If a deed whose words simply operate by way of presumption to carry the title to the center of the street may be regarded as ambiguotis in description, then clearly such rule is applicable to the deed now under consideration

Hudson River Power Transmission Co. v. United Traction Co.

98 A.D. 568 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1904

Clearly such an averment is entirely consistent with the allegation of full performance contained in the 3d paragraph of the complaint. … I am of the opinion that the facts therein stated tend to establish an equitable defense against the plaintiff’s claim that the defendant had rescinded and abandoned the contract in its entirety, and that, if established,

Del Vecchio v. Danielle Associates, LLC

108 A.D.3d 583 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 10, 2013

“The promise to indemnify should not be found unless it can be clearly implied from the language and purpose of the entire agreement and the surrounding facts and circumstances” (Roldan v New York Univ., 81 AD3d at 628 ). … In opposition, Danielle failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether *588 the injured plaintiff sustained a qualifying grave injury (see Kitkas v Windsor Place Corp., 72 AD3d at 650 ; Goodleaf v Tzivos Hashem, Inc

Langan v. St. Vincent's Hospital

25 A.D.3d 90 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 11, 2005

The plaintiff does not claim to have been married to the decedent, and clearly he was not, either under the laws of New York or in the eyes of Vermont. … The purpose of the wrongful death statute is well-defined and firmly established.

People v. Russell

165 A.D.2d 327 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 25, 1991

Sylvester Robinson certainly qualified as a person more likely to correctly identify the individual shown in the photograph” (United States v Robinson, supra, at 282; see also, United States v Lucas, 898 F2d 606 [8th Cir … Moreover, its probative value clearly outweighed any prejudicial impact.

Adams v. Gillig

131 A.D. 494 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 3, 1909

one who sets his hand and seal to a written instrument, knowing its contents, *501 cannot be permitted to set up that he did so in reliance upon some verbal stipulation, made at the time, relating to the same subject, and qualifying … It would be difficult to find *502 an authority more directly in point and more clearly decisive of the proposition that the oral stipulation alleged to have been made by the defendant in this case was not competent evidence

Mashreqbank PSC v. Ahmed Hamad Al Gosaibi & Bros.

101 A.D.3d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 25, 2012

Awal is a bank established by Al Sanea in Bahrain. … The Texas statute at issue provided that the defendant, as an agency of that state, enjoyed immunity from suit.

Matter of Reese v. Reese

2019 NY Slip Op 7403 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 16, 2019

The party seeking modification has the burden to "clearly and definitely establish the occurrence of a substantial change in the circumstances of either party that makes the continuation of the prior order unfair and improper … "[T]o qualify as a substantial change in circumstances, a change or alleged inability to pay must be excusable and not brought about by the defendant's own fault.

In re the Final Accounting of Leventritt

40 A.D. 429 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 15, 1899

The assignee qualified on the next day and the assignment and schedules were filed at the same time. Late in the afternoon of December first the assignee took possession of the store. … Bindseil to establish a large claim against the estate whicli'Lad no foundation in law, and clearly colluded with her himself to enable her to purchase this stock for much less than the value.

Asian Americans for Equality v. Koch

128 A.D.2d 99 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 1987

The Planning Commission’s proposal to establish the District includes regulations for its administration. … action was commenced approximately four months after the Board of Estimate approved the establishment of the District.

Aberger v. Camp Loyaltown, Inc.

193 A.D.3d 195 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 25, 2021

clearly moments after it happened. … "[E]ven if a hazard qualifies as 'open and obvious' as a matter of law, that characteristic merely eliminates the property owner's duty to warn of the hazard, but does not eliminate the broader duty to maintain the premises

Catt v. Catt

118 A.D. 742 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 5, 1907

There is in the scheme of the testator a clearly expressed purpose of making a gift to the college, not for its present benefit, but for the purpose of holding the fund in trust to support scholarships to be awarded to a … But if it be assumed that the testator intended to make a gift to the State of Iowa, is that State qualified to take and hold real ‘ estate in the State of Uew York for the purpose expressed in this *746 will ?

Grannan v. Westchester Racing Ass'n

16 A.D. 8 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1897

The 1st section of the Civil Rights Act is absolute in its declaration of right, and is not qualified by anything contained in its subsequent sections. … It does not aim in any respect to qualify the declaration •contained in the 1st section.