Case law

Riddell v. City of New York

2022 NY Slip Op 05878 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 19, 2022

immunity. … Here, to the extent that the plaintiffs alleged negligence with respect to the planning and design of the exit ramp, the defendants met their burden of establishing, prima facie, that they were entitled to qualified immunity

People v. Lyon

82 A.D.2d 516 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 31, 1981

Clearly, the State can qualify as an “owner” of property, as subdivision 7 of section 10.00 of the Penal Law includes the “government” within its definition of “person”. … The record therefore clearly indicates that the individual defendant willingly signed the waiver of immunity in the presence of the Grand Jury, with the assistance of counsel, and only after being fully apprised of his rights

Dunajewski v. Bellmore-Merrick Central High School District

138 A.D.2d 557 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 21, 1988

A qualified privilege serves to negate any presumption of implied malice or ill will flowing from a defamatory statement. … Given the complete absence of any proof of malice or ill will on the part of any of the defendants, a qualified privilege attached thereby immunizing these defendants from civil liability and accordingly their motion for

Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc. v. Dunn

305 A.D.2d 459 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 12, 2003

The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact that it had a clearly-established right to approval of the County permit which it claims was wrongfully denied (see Penlyn Dev. … Additionally, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity (see Natale v Town of Ridgefield, 927 F2d 101, 104 [1991]).

Wright v. City of Buffalo

137 A.D.3d 1739 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 25, 2016

immunity, it must be established that it was objectively reasonable for the police officer [s] involved to believe that [their] conduct was appropriate under the circumstances, or that officers of reasonable competence could … immunity.

Gregorio v. City of New York

246 A.D.2d 275 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 20, 1998

The City also raised the defense of qualified governmental immunity. … Thus, in this respect, we find the City is not entitled to the defense of qualified immunity.

Salla v. County of Monroe

64 A.D.2d 437 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 10, 1978

employees, Salla and Keppley, do not have standing to challenge the constitutionality of section 222 of the Labor Law because there is no legal relationship between them and the County and Division and because they have not established … statute granting an employment preference to unemployed residents or to residents enrolled in job training programs might be permissible [the statute’s] across-the-board grant of a job preference to all Alaskan residents clearly

Villarin v. Rabbi Haskel Lookstein School

96 A.D.3d 1 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 12, 2012

Indeed, as noted above, in enacting Social Services Law § 413, the Legislature determined that a qualified immunity from civil and criminal liability would remove “the fear of an unjust lawsuit for attempting to help protect … The Legislature deemed qualified immunity “indispensable,” as it furthered the strong public policy of protecting children (Sabol, 93 NY2d at 721 ). This Court declines to dilute such critical statutory protection.

Klebe v. Tri-Municipal Sewer Commission

160 A.D.2d 677 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 2, 1990

The question "[w]hether an action receives only qualified immunity, shielding the government except when there is bad faith or the action taken is without a reasonable basis * * * or absolute immunity, where reasonableness … Accordingly, we find that the Sewer Commission may invoke only a qualified immunity from liability.

Gaynor v. Rockefeller

21 A.D.2d 92 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 21, 1964

Such contracts may not be attacked by a taxpayer’s suit unless shown to be clearly illegal or a waste of public funds (Grace v. Scott, 125 Misc. 660, affd. 214 App. Div. 792 ). … Establishing the contention as a factual truth, in a proper proceeding, would permit legal redress (cf. Railway Mail Assn. v. Corsi, 293 N. Y. 315 , affd. 326 U. S. 88 ).

Holmes v. City of Elmira

251 A.D.2d 844 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 18, 1998

of New York, 67 NY2d 271, 283 ), such immunity is of a qualified nature (see, Martin v Reedy, 194 AD2d 255, 258 ), dependent upon an ability to show that the decision was the result of a deliberate decision-making process … Having failed to show its entitlement to qualified immunity at this juncture (see, Appelbaum v County of Sullivan, supra, at 989), we next address the City’s contention that it was the driver’s negligence, and not the failure

Herlihy v. Metropolitan Museum of Art

214 A.D.2d 250 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 10, 1995

Under New York law, "communications protected by a qualified privilege do not provide the communicant with an immunity against the imposition of liability in a defamation action” (Toker v Poliak, supra, at 219). … Plaintiffs tort claims, however, are all brought under well-established, clearly defined causes of action under New York law and will not be dismissed based upon defendants’ attempt to mischaracterize them as the defendants

Guan v. State

55 A.D.3d 782 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 21, 2008

After a nonjury trial, the Court of Claims dismissed the claim, determining, among other things, that the State was entitled to qualified immunity and was not required to comply with the modern highway design standards established … However, “in the field of traffic design engineering, the State is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision” (id.).

Kosoff-Boda v. County of Wayne

45 A.D.3d 1337 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 9, 2007

It is well established that, “in the field of traffic design engineering, the [municipality] is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision” (Friedman v State of New York, 67 NY2d … Pursuant to the doctrine of qualified immunity, “liability for injury arising out of the operation of a duly executed highway safety plan may only be predicated on proof that the plan either was evolved without adequate study

Scott v. City of New York

16 A.D.3d 485 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 14, 2005

The City failed to establish, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its defense of qualified immunity (see Ernest v Red Cr. Cent. School Dist., 93 NY2d 664, 673 [1999]; cf. … Affleck v Buckley, 96 NY2d 553, 557 [2001] [for qualified immunity to attach, the traffic study must consider the very same question of risk that would go to the jury]).

Rew v. County of Niagara

115 A.D.3d 1316 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 28, 2014

With respect to the fourth cause of action, against the deputy sheriff, defendants contended that the deputy sheriffs actions were entitled to qualified immunity. … “To be entitled to qualified immunity, it must be established that it was objectively reasonable for the police officer involved to believe that his or her conduct was appropriate under the circumstances, or that officers

Rodriguez v. Palacio

157 N.Y.S.3d 75 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 3, 2021

immunity. … "Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a governmental body may not be held liable for a highway safety planning decision unless its study of the traffic condition is plainly inadequate or there is no reasonable basis

Mansour v. Abrams

144 A.D.2d 905 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1988

However, defendants have not established that Marcus, who prepared the plaintiff’s performance evaluations relied on by Goldstock, had the authority to terminate plaintiff. … Because of this threshold factual question, we do not reach the issue of whether defendants are entitled to summary judgment based on their defense of qualified immunity as delineated in Anderson v Creighton ( 483 US 635

Scully v. Town of Mamaroneck

129 N.Y.S.3d 167 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 12, 2020

The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition. … The individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, as they are government officials performing discretionary functions, and their conduct did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Lentini v. Page

5 A.D.3d 914 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 11, 2004

The court later granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint, finding that defendant is entitled to qualified immunity per Social Services Law § 419 and that plaintiff failed to submit evidence … “The reporting requirements which trigger the qualified immunity provision contained in Social Services Law § 419 are not predicated upon actual or conclusive proof of abuse or maltreatment.