Case law

Bystrom v. Villard

175 A.D. 433 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 8, 1916

This he claims to be a complete defense to this action for damages, and the sole question in the case is whether or not this claim to immunity is valid under all the circumstances of the case. … If they did know, and misrepresented, then they are clearly liable for such fraud. If they did not know its condition, then they knew of such lack of knowledge on their own part.

Hughes-Berg v. Mueller

50 A.D.3d 856 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 15, 2008

Although the plaintiff had alcohol on her breath, she allegedly spoke clearly, albeit slowly, and walked to the car without assistance. … A municipal defendant is immune from liability for negligence claims arising from the performance of its governmental functions unless the plaintiff can establish the existence of a special relationship between the injured

Doe v. Coughlin

125 A.D.2d 783 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 4, 1986

In December 1985, John Doe was diagnosed as having Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and was placed in the hospital unit at Auburn where he has remained since. … to what constitutes the "special review” accorded an applicant with a communicable disease, and little elaboration was provided in the review procedure described, the underlying basis for respondents’ determination was clearly

Curry v. County of Suffolk

2026 NY Slip Op 02246 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 15, 2026

The County moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims insofar as asserted against it on the grounds, inter alia, that it was entitled to governmental function immunity and that the negligence … "The overarching principle governing determinations of proximate cause is that a defendant's negligence qualifies as a proximate cause where it is a substantial cause of the events which produced the injury" ( Hain v Jamison

Matter of Raymond E.

2025 NY Slip Op 04006 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 2025

OPINION & ORDER Mental Hygiene Law § 9.27 et seq. establishes the procedure for the involuntary admission and retention of patients alleged to be mentally ill in a hospital. … to collaborate in the specialty involved, and issue prescriptions for drugs, devices, and immunizing agents.

Blanck v. Nelson

39 A.D. 21 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1899

The complaint sets forth facts which, if established by the evidence, are sufficient to constitute embezzlement and to subject the defendant to arrest under the provisions of section 549 of the Code of Oivil Procedure, and … if it should happen that the court, in com *22 plying with rule 13, has stated more than is necessary in the order of arrest, it can give the defendant no immunity.

Koutnik v. Murphy

25 A.D.2d 197 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 29, 1966

So that it clearly appears that the statute authorized, if it did not mandate, the procedure adopted by the Commissioner. … Its availability is established by the fact that petitioner took advantage of it. Its efficacy needs no demonstration.

Seong Sil Kim v. New York City Transit Authority

27 A.D.3d 332 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 23, 2006

Plaintiffs failed to establish that defendant was negligent or, if negligent, that its negligence was the proximate cause of these injuries. … In fact, ordinarily the Transit Authority may have been entitled to the protection of qualified immunity (see DeLeon v New York City Tr. Auth., 305 *335 AD2d 227 [2003]; Saborido-Calvo v New York City Tr.

McEnaney v. State

267 A.D.2d 748 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 16, 1999

injured person establishes a special relationship with the entity, which would create a specific duty to protect that individual, and the individual relied on the performance of that duty” (Miller v State of New York, 62 … In circumstances as are presented here, as tragic as they clearly are, the State is not an insurer or guarantor of the safety of SUNYA students, and had no legal duty to shield SUNYA students from the criminal actions of

People v. Raife

250 A.D.2d 864 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 26, 1998

Its determination *865 should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88 ). … v Sibadan, 240 AD2d 30, 38 , quoting People v Ferguson, 154 AD2d 706, 707 , cert denied 498 US 947 ), and does not qualify for admission.

Spring v. County of Monroe

2019 NY Slip Op 747 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 1, 2019

The absolute privilege defense affords complete immunity from liability for defamation to " an official [who] is a principal executive of State or local government' . . . with respect to statements made during the discharge … Even assuming, arguendo, that the statements were not covered by absolute privilege, we conclude that the defense of qualified privilege applies.

Frome v. Board of Elections of Nassau County

89 A.D.2d 950 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 1, 1982

Upon examination of the designating petitions, we find that the information contained therein clearly establishes that the subscribing witnesses are residents of the “political *951 subdivision in which the office or position … Here the subscribing witnesses set forth their residential addresses with sufficient clarity to establish that they are qualified, under the statute, to serve as witnesses.

Fredette v. Town of Southampton

95 A.D.3d 940 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 8, 2012

The Supreme Court properly granted the motion of the Town of Southampton for judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, as it was immune from liability pursuant to General Obligations … Here, the plaintiffs evidence establishes that he had at least perused the manual.

People v. Williams

51 A.D.3d 1141 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 8, 2008

immunity to which he would otherwise become entitled” (CPL 190.45 [1]). … Specifically, testimony from other witnesses at trial established that the victim was with defendant in his automobile on Stanley Street when defendant met with an individual named William Farrow. 3 As Farrow and defendant

Rhymes v. Elrac, LLC

2025 NY Slip Op 01830 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 26, 2025

"Statements given to a liability insurer's claims department which are solely 'prepared in anticipation of litigation' are entitled to qualified immunity from discovery pursuant to CPLR 3101(d)(2)" ( Kin Hwa Ku v City of … Where, as here, the party seeking to prevent disclosure makes the required showing that the materials were solely prepared in anticipation of litigation, the burden shifts to the party seeking disclosure to establish that

Lubecki v. City of New York

304 A.D.2d 224 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 27, 2003

His additional bona tides were well established. … Thus, the evidence established that the police violated clearly established protocols and procedures, rendering the professional judgment rule inapplicable to immunize their affirmative acts of negligence (Rodriguez v City

Flagstar Bank v. State

114 A.D.3d 138 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 26, 2013

“[Claimants must first establish the existence of a special duty owed to them by the State before it becomes necessary to address whether the State can rely upon the defense of governmental immunity” (Metz v State of New … Thus, the legislature clearly knew how to include a private right of action when it intended to do so, and the omission of any similar language in CPLR 5018 and 5203 evinces a legislative intent not to provide for a private

New York State Ass'n of Nurse Anesthetists v. Noveleo

301 A.D.2d 895 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 23, 2003

As Education Law article 139 directly and specifically addresses the practice of professional nursing and the other provisions relied upon by plaintiff are constitutional guarantees of all citizens, plaintiff’s members clearly … Indeed, CNRAs clearly are “subject to and directly affected by” the Guidelines and thus unquestionably are the appropriate parties to bring this action (Subcontractors Trade Assn. v Koch, 62 NY2d 422, 426 ; see Matter of

Lewis v. Village of Lyons

54 A.D.2d 488 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 10, 1976

this municipal land is not subject to a claim of adverse possession, it is well settled that where lands are held by a municipality in its proprietary capacity, as distinguished from its governmental capacity, there is no immunity … "In qualifying the character of the possession required at common law, it is usually said that it must be hostile and under claim of right, actual, open and notorious, exclusive and continuous. (E. g., Belotti v.

People ex rel. Lewisohn v. O'Brien

81 A.D. 51 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 15, 1903

The offer of the district attorney and the consent of the magistrate to grant the relator immunity from any criminal prosecution would not bar such a prosecution, and, therefore, could not afford him full immunity therefrom … The principle established by these decisions is that no one shall be compelled in, any judicial or other proceeding against himself,, or upon the trial of issues between others,.to disclose facts or circumstances that can