Case law

Moran v. Lascaris

61 A.D.2d 405 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 1, 1978

Petitioners urge that since Anna Moran’s homestead was clearly exempt under section 366 (subd 2, par [a], cl [1]) of the Social Services Law and since she owned the homestead at the time that she originally qualified for … medical assistance, her transfer of that property was not made for the purpose of qualifying for medical assistance.

Kagan v. State of New York

221 A.D.2d 7 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 17, 1996

It is further established that there is no governmental immunity for the negligent performance of these ministerial duties (see, Marx v State of New York, 169 AD2d 642 ; National Westminster Bank v State of New York, 155 … The evidence further establishes that the claimant’s hearing was damaged as a direct result of these omissions.

Bonded Concrete, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

268 A.D.2d 771 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 13, 2000

However, we are also guided by the well-established but countervailing precept that zoning restrictions are in derogation of the common law and, as such, must be strictly construed against the municipality which enacted and … Section 4.1 clearly indicates that section 8.3.1 site plan approval is triggered by size criteria and, indeed, subdivisions (a), (b) and (c) of section 8.3.1 contain some type of threshold size qualifier which must exist

People v. Sennon

170 A.D.2d 546 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 11, 1991

The jury was made aware of Logan’s use and sale of so-called "crack cocaine”, as well as his agreement with the District Attorney which granted him immunity from prosecution. … Its determination should be accorded great weight and should not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88 ).

S.A.B. Enterprisses, Inc. v. Village of Athens

164 A.D.2d 558 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 10, 1991

At the outset, we decline to consider the claim asserted on appeal by defendant’s special counsel that defendant was performing a governmental function in supplying water to plaintiff and, hence, was immune from tort liability … This State does follow the general rule that an owner of property, with a modicum of qualifying experience, may offer a lay opinion as to its value (see, Fassett v Fassett, 101 AD2d 604, 605 ; Irv-Bob Formal Wear v Public

Campbell v. New York Evening Post, Inc.

219 A.D. 169 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 3, 1926

Div. 529 ) there is certain obiter dicta wherein it is suggested that the privilege which affords immunity against falsity of the matter published is limited to reports of judicial proceedings, and that the courts had not … We are, therefore, of the opinion that a qualified privilege existed upon which the defendant properly relied in its report concerning the bringing of the action by Mrs. Nichols against the plaintiff.

Maglich v. Saxe, Bacon & Bolan, P. C.

97 A.D.2d 19 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1983

plaintiff’s prima facie case and thus qualifying for accelerated treatment under CPLR 3213. … However, the subsequent correspondence unequivocally establishes the loan, the renewals for stated periods and the fixed rates of interest.

People v. Andrade

124 A.D.3d 533 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 26, 2015

Therefore, the addition of any one of the three point assessments contested on appeal would be sufficient to qualify defendant as a level two offender. … The court properly assessed 10 points for use of violence, because the victim’s grand jury testimony clearly established that, during one of numerous incidents of sexual misconduct, defendant ignored her plea for him to stop

Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade v. New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission

115 A.D.3d 521 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 18, 2014

The established authority, however, holds otherwise. … Thus, the losses that petitioners incurred as a result of the arbitrary reduction in the taxi lease cap in this case do not qualify as incidental damages. We turn now to the issue of governmental immunity.

Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade v. New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission

115 A.D.3d 521 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 18, 2014

The established authority, however, holds otherwise. … Thus, the losses that petitioners incurred as a result of the arbitrary reduction in the taxi lease cap in this case do not qualify as incidental damages. We turn now to the issue of governmental immunity.

Walker v. State of New York

151 A.D.3d 1147 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 1, 2017

Claimant’s request for *1148 monetary damages is clearly incidental, as the claim does not allege the manner in which such damages are related to the alleged constitutional violations (see Matter of Gross v Perales, 72 NY2d … Moreover, although claimant has asserted a cause of action for unjust conviction under Court of Claims Act § 8-b, he has not provided documentary evidence establishing the necessary elements, i.e., that he was pardoned or

Bohmer v. Haffen

35 A.D. 381 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1898

Such right of combination was clearly incident to the powers of a corporation authorized to construct railways in the regions which might be affected by the consolidation. *387 The exemption of the consolidated company from … the provisions of sections 93, 95 and 98 of the General Railroad Law was not the conferring of any exclusive immunity or privilege.

People v. Nashal

130 A.D.3d 480 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 9, 2015

Thus, we find that the receipt qualified as a business record (see generally CPLR 4518 [a]). … The price information itself was clearly maintained for the store’s business purposes.

Van Dyke v. New York State Department of Education

144 A.D.2d 85 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 26, 1989

Agency ( 133 AD2d 316 , lv dismissed 71 NY2d 889 ), petitioner asserts that the probation period began on the date he officially passed the qualifying examination, i.e., November 1, 1984, when the eligible list was established … No more was required to qualify for this noncompetitive position. That is not the situation here.

Lacorazza v. Lacorazza

47 A.D.3d 897 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 29, 2008

None of the evidence established that the parties intended that the plaintiff would receive a share of the defendant’s pension benefits which accrued subsequent to the divorce (see Ernst v Ernst, 8 AD3d 331 [2004]). … In any event, we note that the plaintiff is guilty of laches since she waited nine years to move to vacate the QDRO, despite the fact that she clearly was aware of its terms immediately after the parties were divorced.

Schittino v. State

262 A.D.2d 824 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 17, 1999

immunity (C. v State of New York, 188 AD2d 506 , lv denied 82 NY2d 655 ) and, based upon our review of the record, we find no bad faith or lack of a reasonable basis for the discretionary decision. … Claimant next maintains that the State violated a regulation or established procedure requiring a correction officer to accompany the feed-up worker during the performance of his tasks.

Bermel v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad

62 A.D. 389 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1901

Y. 1), we may, in support of the judgment, deem the negligence of the defendant to have been' established. … This distinction is clearly recognized in the well-considered case of Wheeler v. Oceanic S. N. Co.

People v. Tellis

156 A.D.2d 260 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 19, 1989

Complainant’s testimony as to the duration of the pain and the evidence presented by photographs taken several days later qualify as objective manifestations of substantial pain, and establish the physical injury element … The testimony clearly established that defendant used force to retain the property when complainant pursued him and only thereafter, albeit momentarily thereafter, discarded the property (see, People v Johnstone, 131 AD2d

Mabb v. Toia

64 A.D.2d 831 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 13, 1978

Here, the Commissioner’s objection is that petitioner’s vocational training simply will not qualify her for the position she seeks. … Finally, the equities of the case clearly warrant this result.

People v. Darrisaw

206 A.D.2d 661 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 14, 1994

Given the foregoing, the prosecutor’s refusal to grant Maiola immunity, though not per se improper (see, People v Owens, 63 NY2d 824 ; People v Finkle, 192 AD2d 783, 787 , lv denied 82 NY2d 753 ), bears profoundly on the … he understood that he could be prosecuted for possession as a result of the admissions made in the affidavit, fulfills the second. * The nature of the statement and Maiola’s direct participation in the events in question clearly