Case law

Keyspan Gas E. Corp. v. Munich Reins. Am., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 1, 2016

Clearly, the general justification for proration to the insured, i.e., encouraging the purchase of insurance to spread risk, does not hold when there is no insurance to be had. … As with the policies in Con Edison , the "all sums" policy language in the policies at bar is qualified by other language.

Thorn v. de Breteuil

86 A.D. 405 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1903

But the “ lienors or actors ” referred • to' were clearly ' either the executors or the creditors, as reference to the context will show. … If the plaintiff in the first action was entitled to a judgment establishing his right to the accumulations, then manifestly this action is for the same cause.

New York Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission

286 A.D. 28 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 24, 1955

Starting with the premise that we must take some form of cost as the measure of value, it is clearly permissible to take the original cost or the actual cost of construction as the standard. … Subsequently, the case was reopened and a partial rate increase was granted to the telephone company because of an increase in taxes and operating expenses but the holding of the 1951 opinion was not in anyway qualified.

Westminster Presbyterian Church of West Twenty-Third Street v. Trustees of Presbytery

142 A.D. 855 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 17, 1911

The presbytery alone has power to form, unite and divide churches, and to establish and dissolve pastoral relationships. … an incorporated church to which this article is applicable, declines to act, resigns or dies, or having been a member of such church, ceases to be such member, or not having been a member of such church, ceases to be a qualified

Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Schorsch

184 A.D.3d 64 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 14, 2020

The authority to establish a post-confirmation litigation trust or estate representative to pursue causes of action is found in Section 1123(b)(3)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code. … Significantly, in determining whether, as the appointed party, the Creditor Trust's responsibilities qualified as a representative of the estate, the bankruptcy court's primary concern was whether a successful recovery by

Madden v. Atkins

4 A.D.2d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 6, 1957

In the case of Sohnen, the findings clearly state that he was guilty of all charges against him. In our opinion, Madden and Liddy were also found guilty of all charges against them. … The fact that there were no members of the board who could qualify as disinterested judges is irrelevent.

Matter of Porter v. New York City Hous. Auth.

2019 NY Slip Op 1128 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 14, 2019

At such a hearing, "[t]he RFM claimant has the burden of proof to demonstrate that (s)he qualifies for a lease" (Manual, ch I, § XII[C][2]). … "At the hearing, before the Impartial Hearing Officer, the RFM claimant must clearly demonstrate that (s)he: • Meets the standards for Remaining Family Member ' status (per Section XII, A) and , • Meets the criteria for Eligibility

People v. Hill

39 A.D.3d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 30, 2007

case, not a gateway to further litigation” (citation omitted)]; People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520, 525 [1978] [“Only rigorous adherence by the courts to a policy of affording guilty pleas a great measure of finality will immunize … Although the Catu opinion does not expressly establish a per se rule of reversal, nothing therein suggests that some failures to advise a defendant about postrelease supervision do not require that the guilty plea be vacated

People v. Green

19 N.Y. Crim. 311 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 15, 1905

—Frequently, in cases of this character, a third person is present, whose capacity as a witness is qualified because of being a child, an accomplice, or the like. … —The “other evidence” in the later Armstrong case is not clearly stated in the opinion, but seems to be of the same character as the supporting testimony in the Boyce case, supra.

Dalton v. Pataki

11 A.D.3d 62 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 7, 2004

Nor can we substitute our judgment for that of the Legislature by establishing a fee percentage that we would deem reasonable. … We note, in addition, that the Mega Millions agreement provides that New York “does not waive the defense of Sovereign Immunity . . . which [states] may have relating to disputed ticket claims and/or player prize claims,

Stern v. Carter

82 A.D.2d 321 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 10, 1981

the cross motion and denying plaintiff’s motion, Special Term held (97 Mise 2d 775) that since the plaintiff was required to demonstrate clearly that he had and would use sufficient financial resources in order to represent … Without adequate resources, the argument continues, a plaintiff could harass a defendant with a frivolous suit, hoping for a large recovery but being immune from financial recriminations if the suit fails (Maute, Class Certification

In Re the Accounting of the Bank of New York

22 A.D.2d 365 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 7, 1965

This establishes prima facie and sufficiently its "also approv(al)" of the Ansonia investments. … Finally, under the circumstances, the exculpatory clause of the trust indenture, by its express terms, clearly has the effect of relieving the trustee from any responsibility for the loss resulting from the Ansonia and Tork

Leone v. Blum

73 A.D.2d 252 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 10, 1980

in Matter of Padilla ( 34 NY2d 36, 41 , supra) would appear to be no more present here than in a household containing a self-supporting member, except in those rare instances in which an SSI beneficiary also happens to qualify … Clearly, this subsidization would be improper if the nonrecipient’s income is legally restricted for his own use and benefit (e.g., the OASDI benefits in Leone).

Hernandez v. State of New York

2019 NY Slip Op 4065 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 23, 2019

The Farm Bureau argues that, because article I, § 17 was adopted just one year after the enactment of SERA, the NY Constitution's use of the word "employees" should be construed to include only those individuals who qualify … As a threshold matter, I agree with the majority that plaintiffs have established standing and that the appeal presents a justiciable controversy.

Matter of Giuliani

2024 NY Slip Op 03561 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 2024

Thus, characterizing respondent's explanation as a "strained interpretation of his statements," the Referee found that "[t]he words Respondent used clearly convey a reference to the 2020 election and cannot be interpreted … However, as already noted, Geels qualified this, noting that his analysis may have contained false positives.

Matter of Giuliani

2024 NY Slip Op 03561 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 2024

Thus, characterizing respondent's explanation as a "strained interpretation of his statements," the Referee found that "[t]he words Respondent used clearly convey a reference to the 2020 election and cannot be interpreted … However, as already noted, Geels qualified this, noting that his analysis may have contained false positives.

In re Mason

208 A.D.2d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 26, 1995

Another former associate testified that months after the fact, he had discussed the settlement with the client who was clearly not happy with it. … However, respondent knew the case was marked ready for trial and had made no provision for having a qualified attorney try the case if the *18 application for adjournment was denied.

Murray v. Town of N. Castle

2022 NY Slip Op 00675 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 2, 2022

Although "[t]his sweeping statement must be qualified today . . . the public interest in preserving official authority over the police remains powerful" ( Matter of Patrolmen's Benevolent Assn. of City of N.Y., Inc. v New … Although the plaintiff contends in his brief on appeal that the Town's position is "specious," and that "[t]he clearly established case law . . . debunks [its] claim," the plaintiff has failed to support these assertions.

New York Central Railroad v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad

13 A.D.2d 309 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 22, 1961

The very least such provision establishes is a security interest in the buildings until New Haven has been repaid its advances. Notably, again, the property interest ceases on reimbursement. … The prospect of New Haven sharing in rentals from a lease in which it did not join was clearly not contemplated.

Akasa Holdings, LLC v. 214 Lafayette House, LLC

2019 NY Slip Op 6447 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 3, 2019

Sav. & Loan , 190 AD2d at 645-646 [although the plaintiff's mortgage had been "indexed under an erroneous lot number," because "the existence of the mortgage lien was clearly recited in the deed conveying the encumbered property … We find it unnecessary to determine whether Carroll is qualified to offer an expert opinion in this matter, since it appears, as more fully discussed below, that Carroll and Beck substantially agree on the results that would