Case law

Boyd v. Village of Mamaroneck

2026 NY Slip Op 02239 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 15, 2026

The Government Defendants Failed to Conclusively Establish that Their Actions Were Shielded from Liability by Governmental Function Immunity or Absolute Immunity Governmental function immunity, sometimes referred to as the … "[A] municipality is not immune from liability based upon the exercise of discretionary authority unless the municipal defendant establishes that the discretion possessed by its employees was in fact exercised in relation

Fleming v. Jenna's Forest Homeowners' Assn., Inc.

2024 NY Slip Op 03216 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 13, 2024

Because the first cause of action alleged only ordinary negligence, defendants were entitled to the immunity afforded by General Obligations Law § 9-103 if they could establish that Fleming was "engaged in one of the enumerated … As the complaint and plaintiffs' submissions established that Fleming was engaged in a covered activity on land suitable for such activity, defendants established their entitlement to immunity pursuant to General Obligations

Attea v. Tax Appeals Tribunal

64 A.D.3d 909 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 9, 2009

traders are not wholly immune from state regulation that is reasonably necessary to the assessment or collection of lawful state taxes” (Department of Taxation & Finance of N.Y. v Milhelm Attea & Bros., 512 US 61, 75 [1994 … In light of these deficiencies, the Tribunal was again unable to substantiate that the sales made by petitioner actually took place on reservations and were made to qualified tribal members—as required by petitioner’s Indian

Tiburcio v. City of New York

2019 NY Slip Op 3537 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 7, 2019

Plaintiff failed to establish bad faith by the officers with respect to false arrest, or actual malice with respect to malicious prosecution ( see Jenkins v City of New York , 2 AD3d 291 [1st Dept 2003]). … Furthermore, the existence of probable cause to arrest and prosecute plaintiff entitled Officer Martinez to qualified immunity under the circumstances ( see e.g. Amore v Novarro , 624 F3d 522 [2d Cir 2010]).

Jones v. Cardinal McCloskey Children's & Family Services

121 A.D.2d 318 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 24, 1986

This evidence seems to us more than sufficient to establish a prima facie case on that issue. … Respondent’s *320 daughter had not seen a doctor since she was one year old, and had not obtained necessary immunizations on a timely basis, despite repeated urgings by the agency.

American Mayflower Life Insurance v. Moskowitz

17 A.D.3d 289 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 2005

Clearly there are questions as to Mosdot’s characteristic sufficient to warrant defeat of this branch of the motion to dismiss. … Counsel has not submitted, nor has the court found, any authority suggesting that a stranger to the policy who commits fraud in such circumstances is immune from liability.

Matter of Garcia v. WTC Volunteer

2022 NY Slip Op 07110 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 15, 2022

As we have previously held, "[b]y describing these locations with such specificity, the Legislature clearly manifested an intention to limit the application of this exception to the two-year filing requirement to work actually … The language of the foregoing statutory provisions, in short, clearly reflects that claimant cannot avail herself of the exception to the two-year filing requirement created by Workers' Compensation Law § 168.

Bridenbaker v. City of Buffalo

137 A.D.3d 1729 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 25, 2016

“If found to be objectively reasonable, the officer’s actions are privileged under the doctrine of qualified immunity” (Holland, 90 AD3d at 844 ). … immunity.

Weidman v. Sibley

44 N.Y.S. 1057 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 10, 1897

Clearly, in an action of this character, the parties not served had no legal right to force themselves into the suit, against the plaintiff’s objection, with the purpose of defeating the action. McKnight v. … He cannot be allowed to appear specially for the purpose of giving a qualified jurisdiction, with the sole object of obtaining a dismissal of the action as to others.

600 West 115th Street Corp. v. Von Gutfeld

169 A.D.2d 56 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 25, 1991

However, in Toker v Poliak ( 44 NY2d 211 , 219 [1978]) the Court of Appeals held that "communications protected by a qualified privilege do not provide the communicant with an immunity against the imposition of liability … In other words, we reach that conclusion, upon the basis of our finding that, as a matter of law, defendant’s remarks are not clearly susceptible of only one nondefamatory interpretation.

In re Ellis

258 A.D. 558 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 7, 1940

Each refused to sign a waiver of immunity, although they expressed a willingness to testify, believing that if .they testified they would secure immunity from prosecution. .Mr, Justice Hooley then made his report to this … The official referee found that the charges were established and that respondent’s attitude before the Special Term was a mere pretext; that his conduct was contemptuous, and he was unfit to continue the practice of the law

In re National Commercial Bank & Trust Co.

260 A.D. 287 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 1940

The trustees set up and established three trusts in accordance with the directions contained in the will from assets owned by testator at the time of his death and received by them from the executors. … True it is that there is no form of security which is entirely immune from chance of loss.

Martin v. Lanigan

150 A.D.2d 899 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 11, 1989

This announcement prompted plaintiff to claim that Resolution No. 1746 and prior policy prevented his removal except for cause, established after a hearing. … The enactment of this resolution was an act clearly within the scope of their official capacity and authority.

Villano v. Conde Nast Publications, Inc.

46 A.D.2d 118 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 26, 1974

Co. (21 N Y 2d 403 [1968]) clearly indicated that a liberal construction is called for in respect of disclosure under CPLR 3101. This court presaged this view in *120 United States Life Ins. Co. v. … , the burden of showing the appropriate immunity should be on the person asserting it (Haire v.

Merchant v. Town of Halfmoon

194 A.D.2d 1031 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 24, 1993

Defendant next contends that the record establishes that Johnson Road was properly designed and constructed as a matter of law. We cannot agree. … Although a municipality is afforded qualified immunity from liability for highway planning decisions (see generally, Green v County of Niagara, 184 AD2d 1044 ; Ganios v State of New York, 181 AD2d 859, 860 ), there is nothing

Washington-Herrera v. Town of Greenburgh

101 A.D.3d 986 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 19, 2012

Accordingly, he established, prima facie, his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the false arrest and false imprisonment causes of action by showing that the plaintiffs confinement was privileged (id.; … In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties’ contentions regarding Olson’s claim of entitlement to qualified immunity (see Foley v County of Suffolk, 80 AD3d 658, 660 [2011]).

Amodio v. City of New York

33 A.D.3d 456 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 19, 2006

The function of selecting firefighting equipment is clearly a discretionary governmental function, and the City’s extensive review process was thus entitled to such immunity (see McCormack v City of New York, 80 NY2d 808 … motion court’s finding that the nonmunicipal defendants’ cross motion for indemnification in the third-party action was untimely; however, we make no modification in this regard because these third-party plaintiffs failed to establish

Jones v. City of New York

2022 NY Slip Op 03504 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 1, 2022

Furthermore, the defendants established that Detective Grayson's actions were privileged under the doctrine of qualified immunity, as they were objectively reasonable ( see Boyd v City of New York , 149 AD3d 683, 686 ; Davila … v City of New York , 139 AD3d 890, 893 ), and his conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known ( see Davila v City of New York , 139 AD3d at

St. Andrew v. O'Brien

45 A.D.3d 1024 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 8, 2007

It is firmly established that “municipalities generally enjoy immunity from liability for discretionary activities they undertake through their agents, except when plaintiffs establish a ‘special relationship’ with the municipality … The record clearly establishes that the services provided by the police officers were for the protection and safety of the public in keeping with general police powers (see Miller v State of New York, 277 AD2d 770, 771 [2000

Krackeler Scientific, Inc. v. Ordway Research Institute, Inc.

97 A.D.3d 1083 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 26, 2012

In 1986, the Legislature added N-PCL 720-a, which affords qualified immunity from litigation to directors, officers and trustees who serve without compensation in not-for-profit corporations (see L 1986, ch 220; Martin v … Paragraph 11 of CPLR 3211 (a) was also enacted at that time to provide an expedited procedure for a defendant to have his or her qualified immunity addressed (see L 1986, ch 220).