Case law

Brown v. Wysong

72 N.Y. St. Rep. 607 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 7, 1896

City of Rochester v. Campbell, 123 N. Y. 412 ; 34 St. Rep. 77 . … City of Rochester v. Montgomery, 72 N. Y. 68 . This principle is illustrated in the case of McGoldrick v. Railroad Co., 20 N. Y. Supp. 914 .

Brown v. City of New York

280 A.D.2d 368 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 15, 2001

Safir, 93 NY2d 758, 762-763 ; Matter of Preddice v Callanan, 69 NY2d 812 ), and petitioners did not meet their burden of presenting competent proof that their dismissals had been in bad faith (see, Matter of Beacham v Brown … , 215 AD2d 334 , lv denied 87 NY2d 801 ; Matter of Thomas v Abate, 213 AD2d 251 ).

Brown v. Nassau Electric Railroad

213 A.D. 834 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 15, 1925

(Palmer v. N. Y. C. & II. R. R. R. Co., 112 N. Y. 234 , 242; Stump v. Burns, 219 id. 306, 310,"' Fagan v. Atlantic Coast hiñe R. R. Co., 220 id. 301, 310.) … (Mdllen v. Schenectady R. Co., 214 N. Y. '300; Sackhe&m v. Pigueron, 215 id. 62; Landon v. Preferred Accident Ins. Co., 43 App. Div. 487 ;; affd., 167 N. Y. 577 .) Kelly,, P.

People v. Brown

105 A.D.3d 1466 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 26, 2013

Therefore, the order of June 6, 2008 is vacated and this Court will consider the appeal de novo (see People v LeFrois, 151 AD2d 1046 [1989]).

People v. Brown

104 A.D.3d 864 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 20, 2013

]; People v Bayes, 78 NY2d 546, 551 [1991]; cf. … People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 [1988]; People v Pegeise, 195 AD2d 337, 339 [1993]).

People v. Brown

103 A.D.3d 662 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 6, 2013

The defendant’s contention that his plea of guilty should be vacated because the facts to which he allocated did not constitute the crime of burglary in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Pryor

Brown v. University of New York

242 A.D. 85 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 6, 1934

The Legislature has vested the Board of Regents with supervisory powers over the practice of dentistry (Matter of Dr. Bloom Dentist, Inc., v. Cruise, 259 N. … (Matter of Mandel v. Board of Regents, 250 N. Y. 173 ; People ex rel. Lieberman v. Van De Carr, 199 U. S. 552 , affg. 175 N. Y. 440 .)

Brown v. Samalin & Bock, P. C.

155 A.D.2d 407 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 6, 1989

A proposed amendment which is devoid of merit should not be permitted, thereby obviating needless, time-consuming litigation (see, Goldstein v Barco of Cal., 109 AD2d 817 ; Fiesel v Nanuet Props. Corp., 125 AD2d 292 ). … Brown, 91 AD2d 287 ).

People v. Brown

105 A.D.3d 498 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 11, 2013

The resentencing proceeding imposing a term of postrelease supervision was neither barred by double jeopardy nor otherwise unlawful (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621 [2011]).

People v. Brown

105 A.D.3d 498 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 11, 2013

The resentencing proceeding imposing a term of postrelease supervision was neither barred by double jeopardy nor otherwise unlawful (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621 [2011]).

Brown v. Raritan Chemical Works, Inc.

188 A.D. 578 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 3, 1919

By its answer the defendant set up: “V. … Day, V. Pres.”

Swantz v. Planning Board

34 A.D.3d 1159 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 30, 2006

enforcement officials and the zoning board of appeals (see Village Law § 7-712-a [4]; § 7-712-b [1]; Matter of Gershowitz v Planning Bd. of Town of Brookhaven, 52 NY2d 763, 765 [1980]; Matter of Jamil v Village of Scarsdale … Thus, the Board had no authority to deny site plan approval based on the zoning issue and that issue was not properly before Supreme Court (see Matter of Gershowitz v Planning Bd. of Town of Brookhaven, supra at 765; Matter

Koncelik v. Planning Board

188 A.D.2d 469 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 7, 1992

Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 , 231; see also, Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 NY2d 591 ; CPLR 7803 [3]). … 348 ; Matter of Currier v Planning Bd., 74 AD2d 872 , affd 52 NY2d 722 ).

Ficalora v. Planning Board

262 A.D.2d 320 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 1, 1999

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review (1) a determination of the Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton, dated June 4, 1997, which, after a hearing, granted the application of nonparties Joseph Guarneri … The determinations to issue the subject permits were neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, Matter of Johnson v Village of Westhampton Beach, 244 AD2d 335 ).

Frank v. Zoning Board

82 A.D.3d 764 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 1, 2011

1041, 1043 [2007]; Matter of Levada v Board of Zoning Appeals of Inc. … [3] [b]; Matter of Pecoraro v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d 608, 614 [2004]; Matter of Goldberg v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of City of Long Beach, 79 AD3d 874 [2010]; Matter of Celentano v Board of Zoning Appeals

Reed v. Planning Board

120 A.D.2d 510 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 1986

, 99 AD2d 770 ; see also, Matter of Hayes v Gibbs, 89 AD2d 656 ; Matter of Freeman v Town of Ithaca Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 61 AD2d 1070 ). … of deleterious changes that adversely affect the adjoining area” (Matter of Van Euclid Co. v Sargent, 97 AD2d 913, 915 ; see, Sackson v Zimmerman, 103 AD2d 843 ).

USAA Casualty Insurance v. Brown

206 A.D.2d 470 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 18, 1994

Co. v Andersen & Co., 75 NY2d 366, 372 ). … Co. v Andersen & Co., supra). We agree with the court that USAA failed to establish that it had subrogation rights against the tenant.

Brown v. Reinauer Transportation Companies, LLC

67 A.D.3d 106 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 10, 2009

OPINION OF THE COURT Mercure, J.R *109 In July 2003, plaintiff George Brown (hereinafter plaintiff) was injured, allegedly as a result of a fall from a ladder on a barge owned and operated by defendants, his employers. … Brief, a board certified specialist in internal medicine and cardiology, was to testify, based upon his review of plaintiff’s medical records, that plaintiff was suffering from cardiomyopathy resulting in fatigue, impaired

People v. Brown

103 A.D.3d 912 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 27, 2013

v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]). … of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (see People v Ames, 96 AD3d 867, 868 [2012]; People v Lupo, 92 AD3d 1136, 1137-1138 [2012]; People v Stewart, 60 AD3d 1111, 1112-1113 [2009]; People v Nowinski, 36 AD3d

Brown v. Smalls

104 A.D.3d 459 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 12, 2013

case of negligence on the part of the driver of the rear vehicle, and imposes a duty on the part of the operator of the moving vehicle to come forward with an adequate nonnegligent explanation for the accident” (Cabrera v … 283 [1st Dept 2001], appeal dismissed 97 NY2d 677 [2001]), and, in any event, is not sufficient to defeat the motion (see Francisco v Schoepfer, 30 AD3d 275, 276 [1st Dept 2006]).