Case law

Anderson v. Board of Education

11 A.D.2d 808 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 20, 1960

Franck v. Board of Education

19 A.D.2d 741 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 8, 1963

An a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act by a school secretary in the New York City public school system to annul the resolution of the Board of Education of the City of New York requesting the medical board … However, petitioner does not have the right to examine, or be furnished with copies of, all reports and findings relating to her (Matter of Kropf v. Board of Educ., 18 A D 2d 919).

McKenna v. Board of Education

269 A.D. 666 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 5, 1945

Montanile v. Board of Education

278 A.D. 791 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 30, 1951

Raptosh v. Board of Estimate

281 A.D. 860 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 3, 1953

Beers v. Board of Education

261 A.D. 901 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 3, 1941

Miceli v. Board of Education

261 A.D. 954 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 21, 1941

Ralph v. Board of Education

103 N.Y.S. 1139 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 1, 1907

O'Rourke v. Board of Education

101 N.Y.S. 1136 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 28, 1906

Genova v. Board of Regents

272 A.D.2d 1095 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 21, 1947

Breithut v. Teachers' Retirement Board

271 A.D.2d 822 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 22, 1946

Gardiner v. Board of Education

276 A.D.2d 977 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 20, 1950

Breithut v. Teachers' Retirement Board

269 A.D. 829 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 15, 1945

Lee v. Board of Education

269 A.D. 777 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 7, 1945

Ralph v. Board of Estimate

280 A.D. 840 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 19, 1951

Nicholson v. Board of Education

43 A.D.2d 945 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 4, 1974

Under such circumstances, no duty may be imposed upon defendant to provide supervision over the playground users (Bennett v. Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., 16 A D 2d 651, affd. 13 N Y 2d 1104; see, also, Kantor v. … Guttman, 38 A D 2d 420; Goldstein v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 23, Town of Hempstead, 24 A D 2d 1015, affd. 18 N Y 2d 991).

Lasky v. Town Board of Amherst

57 A.D.3d 1392 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 31, 2008

By Local Law No. 1-2007, defendant further amended the Town’s Zoning Code by eliminating the Planning Board’s discretion to approve a longer street in that type of subdivision. … “[T]he rights of the parties cannot be affected by the determination of [appeal No. 1] and it is therefore moot” (Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]).

Town Board of Cortlandt v. New York State Board of Real Property Services

282 A.D.2d 467 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 2, 2001

the Lakeland School District is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Lahey v Kelly, 71 NY2d 135 ; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 ; Matter of Town of Cortlandt v New York State Bd. of Real Prop. … Servs., 273 AD2d 317 ; Matter of Glinka v Town of Poughkeepsie, 209 AD2d 773 ; Matter of Romano v Town Bd., 200 AD2d 934 ). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Sterngass v. Town Board of Clarkstown

43 A.D.3d 1037 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 18, 2007

made during the course of a litigation before final judgment is entered may have preclusive effect provided that the parties had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the initial determination (see Marcus Dairy, Inc. v … issue, they are precluded from relitigating it. *1038 Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the appellants’ motion which was for leave to amend the complaints in action Nos. 1 and 2 (see Norwalk v

Nozzleman 60, LLC v. Village Board

34 A.D.3d 680 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 21, 2006

Corp. v Dragoon, 306 AD2d 298, 301 [2003]; Turna v *682 Galgano, 303 AD2d 675, 676 [2003]; Harrington v McManus, 303 AD2d 368, 369 [2003]; Matter of McAteer v Condon, 296 AD2d 412 [2002]; Matter of Irons v Schneller, 258 … Parochial Bus Sys. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 NY2d 539, 545-546 [1983]). Santucci, J.P., Mastro, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.