Case law

BROWN, PAMELA A. v. PATTERSON, RALPH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 5, 2013

BROWN, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RALPH PATTERSON, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT, AND ALAINNA BROWN, RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO. 2.) DAVID J. … v Patterson ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [July 5, 2013]).

US Bank National Ass'n v. Brown

139 A.D.3d 430 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 3, 2016

No appeal lies from a decision (see CPLR 5512 [a]; Gunn v Palmieri, 86 NY2d 830 [1995]), or from an appealed paper directing the settlement of an order (see Murray Hill Manor Co. v Destination Paradise, 266 AD2d 132 [1999 … Since the issues raised herein are not properly before us, the appeal must be dismissed (see Rodriquez v Chapman-Perry, 63 AD3d 645, 646 [2009]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, ManzanetDaniels, Gische and Gesmer, JJ.

Brown v. Long Beach Memorial Hospital

196 A.D.2d 802 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 13, 1993

Under these and all of the other circumstances of this case (see, La Buda v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. … Ctr., 98 AD2d 711 ), we conclude that the plaintiff has not demonstrated an excusable default (see, White v Leonard, 140 AD2d 518 ), or a meritorious cause of action. Mangano, P.

Brown v. Transcare New York, Inc.

27 A.D.3d 350 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 23, 2006

Baraban v Orient-Express Hotels, 292 AD2d 203 [2002]). … [2003]; Bailey v New York City Tr.

Steger v. Board of Examiners of Board of Education

260 A.D. 1003 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 13, 1940

People ex rel. Brown v. Metz

119 A.D. 271 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 24, 1907

In Reis v. City of New York ( 188 N. Y. 58 ) it would seem to be the opinion of the Court of Appeals that •portions of this act of 1895 were in-force. … The determination-of the board of public improvements was a determination -by the authorities vested with that power under the statute of 1895, and we think, therefore, that the relators were entitled to a deed of the property

Brown v. Vail-Ballou Press, Inc.

188 A.D.2d 972 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 1992

Accordingly, the proposed cause of action does not relate back to the interposition of the original claim (see, CPLR 203 [e]; Perez v Wegman Cos., 181 AD2d 1010 , lv denied 80 NY2d 753 ; Smith v Bessen, 161 AD2d 847, 849

Bauer v. Planning Board

159 A.D.2d 532 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 12, 1990

Baptist Church v Saunders, 285 NY 462, 474 ; Papa Gino’s v Plaza at Latham Assocs., 135 AD2d 74, 77 ; 7A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶¶ 6301.05, 6301.12; 1 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac §§ 2:68, 2:69). … Brown, J. P., Rubin, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Brown

130 A.D.3d 545 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 28, 2015

occurred, as required by the policy (see Schaaf v Pork Chop, Inc., 24 AD3d 1277, 1278 [4th Dept 2005] [admissions attributed to insured in plaintiff’s investigator’s affidavit constituted admissible evidence sufficient to … Moreover, based on Brown’s default in appearing in this action, Brown has admitted the allegations in the complaint that he did not reside in the premises when the incident occurred (see Port Parties, Ltd. v Merchandise Mart

Lerner v. Town Board

244 A.D.2d 336 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 3, 1997

Under these circumstances, the Town Board’s denial of the special use permit was not supported by substantial evidence, was arbitrary and capricious, and was properly annulled (see, Matter of Tandem Holding Corp. v Board … of Zoning Appeals, 43 NY2d 801, 802 ; Matter of North Shore Steak House v Board of Appeals, 30 NY2d 238, 243-244 ; Matter of Markowitz v Town Bd., 200 AD2d 673 ).

Brown v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railroad

4 A.D. 465 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 15, 1896

(Frier v. President & Managers of the D. & H. C. Co., 86 Hun, 464 ; S. C., 33 N. Y. Supp. 886 .) ■ In Miller v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co. ( 92 Hun, 282 ; S. C., 36 N. Y. … In Flinn v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co. ( 142 N.

People ex rel. Haight v. Brown

169 A.D. 695 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 26, 1915

.] § 191, p. 345, citing True v. Davis, 133 Ill. 522 . See, also, Tiedeman Mun. Corp. § 55.) In True v. … In the effort to be fair to the outside localities the village trustees have designated the same persons outside of the village who had already been appointed by the town boards of the towns of White Plains and of Greenburgh

People v. Brown

284 A.D.2d 572 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 7, 2001

The judgment is, accordingly, affirmed and defense counsel’s application for leave to withdraw is granted (see, People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979 , lv denied 67 NY2d 650 ). Cardona, P.

People v. Brown

72 A.D.3d 698 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 6, 2010

In an order dated March 11, 2010, the Supreme Court, Kings County, in accordance with the Court of Appeals’ recent decision in People v Williams ( 14 NY3d 198 [2010]), vacated the periods of postrelease supervision challenged

People v. Brown

282 A.D.2d 755 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 30, 2001

—Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated November 2, 1992 (People v Brown, 187 AD2d 437 … The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel (see, Jones v Barnes, 463 US 745 ). O’Brien, J. P., S. Miller, Krausman and Gold-stein, JJ., concur.

Matter of Brown v. Cruz

132 N.Y.S.3d 661 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 18, 2020

Matter of Brown v Cruz ( 2020 NY Slip Op 06774 ) Matter of Brown v Cruz 2020 NY Slip Op 06774 Decided on November 18, 2020 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to … V-10951-17, V-13146-17) [*1]In the Matter of Joe B. Brown, respondent, v Vanessa Cruz, appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Vanessa Cruz, appellant, v Joe B. Brown, respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.) Irene J.

Town Board v. Meehan

226 A.D.2d 702 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 29, 1996

Assocs. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157 ; Heritage Co. v Village of Massena, 192 AD2d 1039 ; Matter of Town of Watertown, Water Dist. No. 2 v State of N. Y. Dept. of Envtl. … Town of Clarkstown, 217 AD2d 607 ; Franza’s Universal Scrap Metal v Town of Islip, 89 AD2d 843 ; State of New York v City of Binghamton, 72 AD2d 870 ).

Brown v. City of New York

265 A.D.2d 284 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 4, 1999

251, 253 ; see also, Thomas v Town of Oyster Bay, 190 AD2d 731 ; Cappadonna v New York City Tr. … City of New York, 174 AD2d 723 ; Konsker v City of New York, 172 AD2d 361 ; Krug v City of New York, 147 AD2d 449 ).

People v. Brown

284 A.D.2d 279 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 28, 2001

The totality of defendant’s conduct clearly warranted an inference of accessorial liability (see, People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 ). Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Andrias, Lerner, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

People v. Brown

285 A.D.2d 556 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 16, 2001

Counsel’s application for leave to *557 withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738 ; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 ; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 ).