Case law

Jones v. Albany County Sheriff's Department

123 A.D.3d 1331 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 18, 2014

Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s cross motion and granted defendants’ motion, finding that, as a matter of law, Curry was entitled to qualified immunity under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104 in that he was engaged in the emergency … This statutory qualified immunity “precludes the imposition of liability for otherwise privileged conduct except where the conduct rises to the level of recklessness” (Saarinen v Kerr, 84 NY2d 494, 497 [1994]; see Green v

Lack v. E. P. Lawson Co.

21 A.D.2d 795 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 8, 1964

The record discloses that this expert was amply qualified. … Where, as here, the expert was clearly qualified, his testimony should have been permitted to remain in the record, and the case should have proceeded to a determination on the merits upon the basis of all the proof adduced

Beam v. Wilson

279 A.D. 277 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 9, 1952

The record clearly indicates that the correct hours were given wide publicity. … It is necessary that it be a 1 school district ’ and a school meeting within the district in order that the qualifications of voters be established.”

People v. Victor

139 A.D.3d 1102 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 2016

"'Although not every violation of CPL 310.30 is immune from normal preservation principles, a failure to apprise counsel about the specific contents of a substantive note from a deliberating jury violates the fundamental … tenants of CPL 310.30 and qualifies as a mode of proceedings error,' which does not require preservation" (People v Cotton, 127 AD3d 778, 779 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1200 [2015], quoting People v Silva, 24 NY3d 294, 299

Bogoni v. Simpson

306 A.D.2d 125 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 17, 2003

Bogoni’s assertion that a reader of the notice would understand that it referred to him is clearly one that could only be resolved at trial. However, the notice in question was directed by Ms. … Only the latter establishes reckless disregard in a defamation action” ( 80 NY2d at 438 ). Nothing in the record here tends to establish that Ms.

Ibero-American Action League, Inc. v. Palma

47 A.D.2d 998 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 23, 1975

A reading of the Mental Hygiene Law as it pertains to the establishment of drug rehabilitation centers (§81.01 et seq.; § 83.01 et seq.) shows no clearly defined intent to pre-empt reasonable local regulation of the location … one such regulation provides that "To qualify for approval every applicant and every agency shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the commission, its compliance with all applicable * * * local laws, ordinances, rules,

Dwan v. Massarene

199 A.D. 872 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 10, 1922

Thus was clearly raised an issue of fact that could not be determined on affidavits, and the parties were correctly remitted to a trial. … Plaintiff’s affidavit must state such facts as are necessary to establish a good cause of action.

Gilbane Bldg. Co./TDX Constr. Corp. v. St. Paul Fire & Mar. Ins. Co.

143 A.D.3d 146 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 15, 2016

It argued that plaintiffs did not qualify as additional insureds and that plaintiffs had failed to satisfy the notice of occurrence and notice of suit conditions in the policy. … Supreme Court denied Liberty’s motion, holding that plaintiffs qualified as additional insureds under the policy ( 2014 NY Slip Op 33766[U] [2014]).

Harris v. Seneca Promotions, Inc.

149 A.D.3d 1508 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 2017

NWSC appeals from an order that denied its motion for a protective order and directed respondent to comply fully with the subpoena by producing the documents specified by petitioner and a witness qualified to testify on all … Finally, NWSC did not request a hearing on the issue whether sovereign immunity bars enforcement of the subpoena, and thus failed to preserve for our review its present contention that the matter should be remitted for that

Harris v. Seneca Promotions, Inc.

149 A.D.3d 1508 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 2017

NWSC appeals from an order that denied its motion for a protective order and directed respondent to comply fully with the subpoena by producing the documents specified by petitioner and a witness qualified to testify on all … Finally, NWSC did not request a hearing on the issue whether sovereign immunity bars enforcement of the subpoena, and thus failed to preserve for our review its present contention that the matter should be remitted for that

Finley v. Spaulding

274 A.D. 522 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 29, 1948

The theory upon which the Special Term reached its conclusion that this meeting did not fall within the purview of the statute is clearly untenable. … the district established.

Gonnerman v. State

48 A.D.3d 517 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 13, 2008

Contrary to the State’s contention, copies of certificates of insurance, without more, are insufficient to establish the existence of coverage for the underlying accident. … Moreover, Merchants’ alternative contention that the main claim should be dismissed on the ground of qualified immunity is without merit, as Merchants failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter

In re the Appointment of a Conservator of the Property of Noel

92 A.D.2d 1053 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 24, 1983

Noel, Sr., who is 84 years old, in failing health and a man of means, is clearly established; at issue is who should be designated. Petitioners, daughter and son-in-law of the conservatee, seek the appointment. … Hodgkins is amply qualified to perform the duties of conservator in co-operation with a bank which will act as custodian of the conservatee’s assets and provide investment advice.

Bowles v. State

208 A.D.2d 440 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 20, 1994

Despite the claimant’s contention that he was proceeding under the theory of res ipsa loquitur and, therefore, did not have to serve a certificate of merit, the conduct complained of clearly sounded in medical malpractice … The Attorney-General’s Office is absolutely immune from civil liability in the circumstances even if motivated by malice (see, Rosen & Bardunias v County of Westchester, 158 AD2d 679, 680 , lv denied 76 NY2d 703 , cert denied

Howe v. Howe

68 A.D.3d 38 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 29, 2009

The manner in which disability pensions are treated for equitable distribution purposes is well established. … His commentary criticizing the exclusion clearly implies that it encompasses the economic component of a personal injury award.

People v. Doll

98 A.D.3d 356 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 6, 2012

Although the record indicates that the deputies seized defendant’s clothing, it does not clearly establish whether that seizure occurred before or after the victim’s body was found. … Although the record does not clearly establish the exact time of that seizure, the record does establish that it occurred after he was handcuffed.

Baldridge v. State

293 A.D.2d 941 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 25, 2002

Defendants’ submissions in support of their motion for summary judgment, which included the affidavit of Riccucci, a copy of the Doctoral Program Manual and other business records of the University, clearly established that … We reject claimant’s contentions that Red Owl was unavailable and Riccucci was not qualified to advise him.

Atkinson v. County of Oneida

77 A.D.2d 257 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 13, 1980

To save court time, it was stipulated that plaintiffs had witnesses available who, if called, would testify that they had observed drivers disregard the stop signs at this intersection, resulting in near accidents; that qualified … “It has long been established that a governmental body, be it the State, a county or a municipality, is under nondelegable duty to maintain its roads and highways in a reasonably safe condition, and that liability will flow

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Silkman

121 A.D. 202 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 23, 1907

Young, who then qualified and who now account. . … This was clearly proper.

Rinefierd v. Blum

66 A.D.2d 351 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 19, 1979

At the time when the senior Rinefierd sold his home and distributed the proceeds he had an established medical need demonstrated by the fact that at age 86 he had already spent the preceding 9 or 10 months in a nursing home … The rules clearly provide that only those resources actually available to an applicant are to be considered in determining eligibility (42 CFR, Part 435, formerly Part 448; see, also, Matter of Dumbleton v Reed, 40 NY2d 586