Case law

People v. Dethloff

259 A.D. 480 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 8, 1940

Both appointees qualified by taking and filing their respective oaths and undertakings. … It is the established law that an appointment to office in anticipation of a vacancy therein is good only in case the officer making the appointment is still in office when the vacancy occurs. (People v.

Mittenthal v. Greenebaum Sons Securities Corp.

229 A.D. 833 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 15, 1930

To that end there must be supporting affidavits proving the cause of action, and that clearly and completely, by affiants who speak with *838 knowledge. … Y. 133 .)Beyond question the moving affidavits of the plaintiff were sufficient to establish his cause of action.

Bero v. State

33 A.D.2d 88 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 25, 1969

While respondents object to the State’s ability to appropriate land and at the same time deny a permit allowing its most profitable use, the grounds for the grant or refusal of a permit are clearly outlined by statute and … The State’s experts presented sufficient comparable sales evidence to establish the market value of claimants’ gravel area, *91 as appropriated and as consequently damaged, and the proof justifies an award of $1,000 per acre

Hoyos v. NY-1095 Avenue of the Americas, LLC

156 A.D.3d 491 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 14, 2017

Indeed, waiting in line to sign in and enter a building cannot possibly qualify as engaged in the “erection, demolition, repairing, altering, painting, cleaning or pointing of a building or structure.” … Clearly, this is not the type of accident section 240 (1) was intended to prevent. The cases upon which the majority and plaintiff rely are inapposite.

People v. Fichther

281 A.D. 159 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 29, 1952

That the Smith incident was not an isolated one, but rather part of a course of conduct pursued by defendants, even after warning by the police to discontinue the practice, was not only clearly established but admitted by … There is no such qualifying language in subdivision 2 of section 851. In other words, under subdivision 2, fear induced by a threat to accuse one of a crime may be extortion, even though the accusation be just.

Lumbrazo v. Woodruff

229 A.D. 407 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 8, 1930

The custom of a trade might qualify a contract, but it could not destroy it. A rational construction must be put on the words relied upon. … The construction desired by the respondents to be established, was unreasonable.” In Wallis v. Pratt & Haynes (L. R. [1911] A.

Waters v. New York City Housing Authority

116 A.D.2d 384 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 21, 1986

Clearly, a landlord must be in a position to prevent the harm complained of before it can be held to have had a duty to do so. … The fact that the actual cause of the injury in this case was the criminal act of a third party does not immunize the defendant from liability.

Langford v. Roman Catholic Diocese

271 A.D.2d 494 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 10, 2000

Clearly no examination of church doctrine is required in order for the plaintiffs claims against her priest to be heard. … Clearly Langford’s claim is not unique.

People v. Diaz

21 A.D.3d 58 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 28, 2005

Some of these factors which qualify a declaration as an excited utterance may also disqualify it from being testimonial under Crawford . … Clearly the People established that the witness “had become unavailable by the time of trial despite reasonable efforts by the People to locate him” (People v Jenkins, 213 AD2d 279, 280 [1995], lv denied 85 NY2d 974 [1995

Mott v. Eno

97 A.D. 580 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1904

That the ■commissioners made such adjudication is not only established by the determination as exjwessed in their report, but is clearly evident from all the other awards which they made. … In a limited or qualified sense this is true. In Striker v.

Marsh v. Kaye

44 A.D. 68 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 15, 1899

It is not a general liability, but a special qualified one, conditioned upon the failure of the primary or principal debtor itself to pay. … This the statute clearly contemplates. A permanent receiver having been appointed, this can only be done by compelling him to account.

Suri v. Grey Global Group, Inc.

2018 NY Slip Op 5627 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 2, 2018

Thus, I would find that plaintiff has met her burden of establishing a prima facie case for all of her claims of employment discrimination. … Her statement that Cirullo told her that he was not qualified for the position constitutes hearsay, and, in any case, does not establish discrimination on Grey's part, especially since Cirullo was already working in the DDS

Union Exchange National Bank v. Joseph

194 A.D. 295 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 17, 1920

The answer sets up a plea of duress, and the following allegations are incorporated by reference in the counterclaim: “ * * * The plaintiff through its duly qualified officers, did coerce, force and by duress and undue influence … The court held that these facts were sufficient to establish an agreement to compound a felony.

People v. Commercial Alliance Life Insurance

21 A.D. 533 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1897

Y. 575 ), it seems impossible to hold that the clear provision in the body of the policy requiring payment of premiums on the first of the month is qualified or rendered doubtful by other portions of the instrument. … We think this evidence was clearly hearsay and incompetent for any purpose whatever.

Vazquez v. Sund Emba AB

152 A.D.2d 389 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 11, 1989

As the appellant does not claim that Anders Sandberg, the Swedish notary public who served the summons and complaint upon it, was otherwise not qualified under Swedish law to make such service, we conclude that the summons … Sweden’s declaration clearly imposes no translation requirement where its Central Authority is not involved in the service 6 (see, Handbook, op. cit., at 78, where the only translation requirement noted relates to Convention

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Kaupper

141 A.D. 54 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 18, 1910

Shbsequéhtly to' the‘probate1 of the-will "these proceedings were started, requiring " the said Catharina Eatipper; as administratrix, to" account tó the "exétíutbrs named in said will,1 who . had" dhly" qualified',' : She … He could. ' That is quite another proposition, and if that be the claim -it should be. clearly proffered and .receive separate consideration.

People ex rel. Kenny v. Folks

89 A.D. 171 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 15, 1903

without a hearing upon specific charges, It has extended this privilege of permanency in public employment to veterans of the army and navy and of fire departments, and this is the standard of privileges which the State has established … , is a person who has shown'such qualities of character that it is for the interests *181 of the Commonwealth to appoint him to certain offices or employments in preference to other male persons if he is found otherwise qualified

Kazaras v. Manufacturers Trust Co.

4 A.D.2d 227 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 28, 1957

These assets consisted of a note of one of the family corporations, stock in the family corporations, some mortgage bonds, and the remainder interest of plaintiff in a life insurance trust that the father had previously established … Later she dis *234 cussed it with her lawyer, Lester Jay, who was to be made one of the trustees in the place of Green, who did not qualify. Only some time later, when she told Mr.

People v. Hudson Valley Construction Co.

165 A.D. 626 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 6, 1915

People ( 195 Ill. 430 ) an agent of the insurance company was permitted to testify, in a suit to recover a statutory penalty, to facts establishing the guilt of the company. … The evidence shows clearly that not one barrel was used.

Matter of Gabriel v. University of the State of N.Y., State of Educ. Dept.

2025 NY Slip Op 01845 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 27, 2025

Indeed, restoration of such licenses is permissive and is granted only in rare cases where the merit of the applicant is clearly established to the satisfaction of the Board. … Absent said foundation, or at the very least expert psychological examiners qualified to opine on petitioner's state of mind, these conclusions, such as they are, are quintessentially arbitrary and capricious and certainly