Case law

Lambert v. Macy's East, Inc.

84 A.D.3d 744 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 3, 2011

Code of City of NY § 8-101 et seq.) against his former employer, the defendant Macy’s East, Inc., among others, alleging, inter alia, that, due to his race, he was denied promotion to a position that was filled with less qualified … The burden then shifts to the employer or employers “ ‘to rebut the presumption of discrimination by clearly setting forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, legitimate, independent, and nondiscriminatory reasons

In re the Claim of Eisenstark

46 A.D.2d 606 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 27, 1975

Subdivision 2 sets up an 1 ‘ Alternate condition ’ ’ for filing a valid original claim while subdivision 1 of section 527 establishes the “ Basic condition ” to qualify. … Had she become unemployed thereafter, she clearly would have qualified under the basic condition.

People v. Schlicteroll

59 A.D.2d 545 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 1, 1977

The facts have been considered and determined to have been established. The appellant and two codefendants were charged with burglary in the first degree. … Clearly, under the total circumstances herein, Longtin was an accomplice as a matter of law, and the jury should have been so charged.

Markel v. Pure Power Boot Camp, Inc.

2019 NY Slip Op 2049 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 19, 2019

No claim is made that she qualifies as an expert. … Tenants Corp ., 2018 NY Slip Op 31431[U] , 4, 2018 WL 3241902 [Sup Ct, NY County2018] [materials not attorney work product CPLR 3101[c] nor did they qualify for immunity under CPLR 3102[d][2]]; Gelvez v Tower 111, LLC , 2017

Seagrist v. Reid

171 A.D. 755 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 10, 1916

. *768 After having duly qualified as such ancillary receiver the said Dickinson, as such receiver, brought suit against these same individual defendants in the Supreme Court of this State, upon the same state of facts alleged … The order referred to, as I understand it, amounted to nothing more than an extension of immunity from a charge of contempt if plaintiffs should make the present motion, which if granted and acted upon would be equivalent

Steele v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

39 A.D.3d 78 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 1, 2007

In any event, the three-month extension provided in section 5218 (c) is not a limitations period; rather, it is a savings clause intended to provide qualified persons, who were unsuccessful in litigation in establishing that … in a personal injury action solely because of the inability to establish the identity of the owner or operator of the offending vehicle, while allowing the full extent of the limitations period to the qualified person who

Smith v. Town of Brookhaven

151 A.D.2d 563 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 12, 1989

Thus, in the field of traffic design engineering, the State is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision (Alexander v Eldred, 63 NY2d 460, 465-466 ; Weiss v Fote, 7 NY2d 579, … 585-586 , supra). * * * "Under this doctrine of qualified immunity, a governmental body may be held liable when its study of a traffic condition is plainly inadequate or there is no reasonable basis for its traffic plan (

Fillman v. Axel

63 A.D.2d 876 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 1, 1978

The rule is, of course, well established in declaratory judgment actions that "on a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, the only question is whether a proper case is presented for invoking … The broad powers vested in the board of directors to manage the building clearly encompass the right to make the decisions here challenged.

Williams & Connolly v. Axelrod

139 A.D.2d 806 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 7, 1988

Respondent further argues that Public Health Law § 206 (1) (j) qualifies for the Public Officers Law § 87 (2) (a) exemption from disclosure. … Petitioner accurately argues that the issue is not whether Public Health Law § 206 (1) (j) falls within the Public Officers Law § 87 (2) (a) exemption to the FOIL presumption of access to records; clearly, it does.

Patterson v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

2025 NY Slip Op 04385 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 25, 2025

Here, it is undisputed that the social media defendants qualify as providers of interactive computer services. … The immunity test established by Barnes focuses not on the name given to a cause of action but instead on "whether a plaintiff's ' theory of liability would treat a defendant as a publisher or speaker of third-party content

Madden v. Town of Greene

64 A.D.3d 1117 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 30, 2009

Further, the Town did not establish its entitlement to qualified immunity as a matter of law for its highway planning decisions with regard to the original design and placement of the guardrail because it did not show that … We agree that, given the lower standard of proof that may be applicable on this issue if plaintiff establishes a causal connection between his claimed amnesia and Freeman’s alleged negligence, the passenger’s testimony was

People v. Perillo

48 A.D.2d 862 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 9, 1975

Upon this record, the evidence was legally insufficient to establish defendant’s guilt of the crime of perjury in the first degree. … The People have failed to establish that defendant’s false testimony was "material” to the investigation being conducted by the Grand Jury (Penal Law, § 210.15).

New Hampshire Insurance v. Wellesley Capital Partners, Inc.

200 A.D.2d 143 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 26, 1994

Thus, the immunity issue was timely raised in their first responsive pleading (Aboujdid v Singapore Airlines, 67 NY2d 450 ). … To establish the asserted agreement, Wellesley does not identify any single document but instead relies upon a series of communications with the foreign defendants.

People ex rel. Pendleton v. Smith

54 A.D.2d 195 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 5, 1976

The cases relied upon by appellant to establish a waiver are distinguishable from the situation found in this case. … Accordingly, upon the facts of this case, the People have failed to establish a waiver by relator of his constitutional immunity from double jeopardy. *201 (3) Appellant contends that relator’s constitutional right to be

Velez v. Craine & Clarke Lumber Corp.

41 A.D.2d 747 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 5, 1973

The statutory language seems clearly intended to be illustrative rather than exclusive. … It concluded that the wrong having been established, the manufacturer should be answerable to the person who suffered the consequences of the wrong.

Board of Education v. Somers Faculty Ass'n

48 A.D.2d 873 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 16, 1975

Within this framework we find that the dispute, before us is clearly within the realm of arbitration. … It cannot be disputed that the granting of sabbatical leaves to some qualified teachers is established policy within the scope of the agreement.

Landwehr v. Grey Advertising Inc.

211 A.D.2d 583 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 31, 1995

Clearly, plaintiff was part of a protected age group and was discharged by defendant (see, Sogg v American Airlines, 193 AD2d 153 , lv denied 83 NY2d 754 , lv dismissed 83 NY2d 846 ). … Hence, the burdens outlined in McDonnell Douglas necessary to establish an age discrimination case have been fulfilled here, warranting denial of summary judgment on the age discrimination claim.

Patterson v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

2025 NY Slip Op 04438 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 25, 2025

Here, it is undisputed that the social media defendants qualify as providers of interactive computer services. … The immunity test established by Barnes focuses not on the name given to a cause of action but instead on "whether a plaintiff's ' theory of liability would treat a defendant as a publisher or speaker of third-party content

People ex rel. Ferguson v. Reardon

124 A.D. 818 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 20, 1908

At least, whether snch be the avowed purpose or not, the evidence obtained by such exaininatipn cgpjcl jised in a prosecution for the crime *821 established, by the statute. (People v. Adams, 176 N. Y. 357 ; S. … If thus objectionable when sought to be applied to a civil action for the forfeiture of goods, such an act is even more clearly objectionable when its purpose is to obtain evidence for use in a criminal proceeding, and it

Kane v. Gaynor

144 A.D. 196 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 1911

Each of the said commissipners of elections shall be at the time of his appointment a resident and a qualified voter of such city. … opinion on State or national politics,” section 196 of the act declaring it to be the “intention of this article, and said intention is hereby declared, to secure in the appointment of the members of the board of elections established