Case law

Zientek v. State

222 A.D.2d 1041 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 22, 1995

The court also should have granted the cross motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs causes of action against the individual defendants based upon their affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Public officials "are clothed with a limited immunity, while discharging their public responsibility” (Teddy’s Drive-In v Cohen, 47 NY2d 79, 82).

Bacon v. County of Westchester

149 A.D.2d 451 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 10, 1989

To establish a cause of action to recover damages for false imprisonment, the plaintiffs must show that "(1) the defendants intended to confine [them], (2) the plaintiff[s] were conscious of the confinement, (3) the plaintiff … Thus, issues of fact exist concerning the reasonableness of the defendants’ conduct and the applicability of their qualified immunity (see, Parvi v City of Kingston, 41 NY2d 553 ; Sindle v New York City Tr.

Heeran v. Long Is. Power Auth. (LIPA)

141 A.D.3d 561 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 13, 2016

Thus, the legislature clearly intended that LIPA “substitute for [a] traditionally private enterprise! … Finally, since NGES’s claim of governmental immunity presupposes that LIPA is entitled to governmental immunity, our conclusion that LIPA is not entitled to immunity necessarily rejects NGES’s claim of immunity as well.

People v. Reiss

255 A.D. 509 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 16, 1938

The falsity of the testimony was sufficiently established. We find no reversible error was committed on the trial. … Y. 285 ), if it has any relation to cases where immunity is intended to be and is granted, would not seem to be applicable to an inquiry directed in good faith towards establishing the commission of crimes by others.

Bounauito v. William Floyd School District

203 A.D.2d 225 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 4, 1994

In surreply, the plaintiffs established that the Town had received a complaint of a missing stop sign at the intersection in 1985, and that the Town ceased its investigation of the complaint when it determined that no stop … While such a governmental function is entitled to qualified immunity, a municipality may be liable where it is demonstrated that its traffic control plan was based on inadequate study or lacked a reasonable basis (see, Alexander

Doyle v. Clauss

190 A.D. 838 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 3, 1920

Qualified privilege does not afford absolute immunity. It excludes the presumption of malice, (Andrews v. Gardiner, supra.) In Capital & Counties Bank v. Henty & Sons (L. R. 7 App. … If the plaintiff establishes malice, then, despite the qualified privilege, damages may be recovered, and even punitive damages as well. (Crane v. Bennett, 177 N. Y. 106, 116 .)

Nassau Children's House, Inc. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Inc.

77 A.D.2d 898 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 11, 1980

The board denied the application, finding that while the shelter was providing an educational program with well-qualified instructors, its primary purpose was that of a children’s shelter and the educational function was … The variances were denied because of the substantial noncompliance with area requirements and the shelter’s failure to establish practical difficulty.

Gutkaiss v. Delaware Ave. Merchants Group, Inc.

2019 NY Slip Op 4527 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 6, 2019

On appeal, the City argues that it is entitled to qualified immunity from this claim or, alternatively, that this claim must be dismissed because it had no prior written notice of the allegedly dangerous condition. … Thus, Supreme Court properly determined that the City failed to establish immunity from plaintiff's negligence claim.

Lifson v. City of Syracuse

41 A.D.3d 1292 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 8, 2007

owes an absolute duty to keep its highways in a reasonably safe condition (see Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 283 [1986]; Weiss v Fote, 7 NY2d 579, 584 [1960], rearg denied 8 NY2d 934 [1960]), it is afforded qualified … immunity from liability arising out of highway planning decisions (see Friedman, 67 NY2d at 283 ; Weiss, 7 NY2d at 584-586 ).

Spickerman v. State

85 A.D.2d 60 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 25, 1982

This directive clearly qualifies as an award of attorneys’ fees and such is expressly prohibited by statute (Court of Claims Act, § 27; see Waterman v State of New York, 33 AD2d 716 ). … Although defendant argues that under the doctrine of sovereign immunity a default judgment for failure to serve and file a timely answer may not be entered against the State, we need only consider whether, under the facts

Rankin v. Harding

191 A.D.2d 926 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 18, 1993

This immunity does not apply "[f]or wilful or malicious failure to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity” (68 Pa Cons Stat § 477-6 [1]). … Although "tubing” is not specifically listed in the Pennsylvania recreational use statute, we conclude that it qualifies as an outdoor winter recreational use within the meaning of the statute (see, Commonwealth of Pa.

Luckey v. City of New York

120 A.D.3d 403 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 7, 2014

The City’s reliance on governmental immunity is unavailing, since there are triable issues of fact as to whether the death was caused in part by a negligent failure to comply with mandatory rules and regulations of the New … Powell also failed to establish her entitlement to qualified immunity (see Anderson v Creighton, 483 US 635, 638 [1987]). The court correctly dismissed plaintiffs’ section 1983 claim against Perry.

Idelfonso v. City of New York

187 A.D.3d 576 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 20, 2020

arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, assault and battery ( see Hernandez v City of New York , 100 AD3d 433 [1st Dept 2012], lv dismissed 21 NY3d 1037 [2013]), as well as the arresting officer's entitlement to qualified … immunity ( see Tiburcio v City of New York , 172 AD3d 455 , 456 [1st Dept 2019]).

Duren v. City of Binghamton

258 A.D. 694 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 6, 1940

There is no immunity under the doctrine of governmental functions unless the negligence arises in connection with the discharge of a governmental function directed and required by a statute of the State of New York. … The evidence clearly establishes the city’s failure in this regard. The moneys paid to plaintiff by the Federal government were wages and not a dole. (Matter of Liebowitz v. Goldwater, 161 Misc. 115 ; Dibner v.

Prendergast v. Cosco

4 A.D.3d 880 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 11, 2004

Although a municipality is afforded qualified immunity from liability arising out of its decisions with respect to highway planning, it may be held liable when it “is made aware of a dangerous highway condition and does not … Thus, we conclude that the Village failed to meet its burden of establishing that it is entitled to immunity from liability as a matter of law (see Ernest, 93 NY2d at 672-673 ).

Wagman v. Bradshaw

292 A.D.2d 84 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 18, 2002

The rule clearly bars a healthcare provider’s written report which interprets the results of a medical test from receipt in evidence. In Schozer v William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. … The danger and unfairness of permitting an expert to testify as to the contents of inadmissible out-of-court material is that the testimony is immune to contradiction.

People v. Ryan

7 A.D.2d 198 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 1958

to answer any questions and handed the foreman another letter refusing to answer further questions but thereafter qualified by agreeing and signing a limited waiver insofar as his position as Research Assistant, Ulster County … Under this long-established procedure, there will never be any guess or surmise as to the intentions of the party or parties.

Ocean State Seafood, Inc. v. Capital Newspaper

112 A.D.2d 662 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 25, 1985

Therefore, defendants were entitled to qualified immunity which can be overcome only by proof that defendants acted in a grossly irresponsible manner without due consideration for the ordinary standards of sound journalism … Finally, the article clearly can be read to charge plaintiffs with a course of conduct involving several wrongful acts in buying and selling contaminated and contraband clams.

Holodook v. Spencer

43 A.D.2d 129 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 13, 1973

Such negligence was not “ parental ” in nature, and liability would have clearly existed had the parties not been parent and child. … If, under Dole, a jury requires him to pay a higher award, it can only be because he has committed a tort under well-established standards.

Manti v. New York City Transit Authority

165 A.D.2d 373 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 19, 1991

While defendants claimed that they were entitled to qualified immunity from plaintiffs’ civil rights claims, the allegations of ticketing of licensed vans, of undue delays of the vans and passengers, of causing damage to … plaintiffs’ property, etc., could permit a jury to determine that defendants’ actions were inconsistent with the constitutional rights of plaintiffs, thus precluding them from asserting a right to qualified immunity shielding