Case law

Miranda v. ESA Hudson Valley, Inc.

124 A.D.3d 1158 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 29, 2015

Assuming that low threshold is met, "[t]he burden then shifts to the employer to rebut the presumption of discrimination by clearly setting forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, legitimate, independent, … As defendant's director of human resources succinctly stated, "If we wanted to terminate [plaintiff] due to his sexual orientation, clearly we [c]ould have done so when we received the employee complaint of [inappropriate

Weinfeld v. State

63 A.D.2d 443 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 27, 1978

For the purpose of the State’s motion to dismiss the claim, the answer clearly admits that the suggestion of the claimant was adopted by the Department in April of 1975 and the claimant was informed by a letter dated November … The Court of Claims found that the State had waived immunity as to violations of a statutory duty and that the cause of action was actionable.

54/55 Sixth Realty Corp. v. Leventhal

51 A.D.2d 714 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 26, 1976

In sum, we find no legitimate basis on the instant record for permitting the respondent to reverse his own prior order; or for the clearly inequitable result achieved. Concur—Murphy, Birns and Nunez, JJ.; Stevens, P. … As such, it did not qualify for luxury decontrol.

Manwaring v. Lippincott

52 A.D. 526 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 15, 1900

On December 5, 1899, the -surrogate admitted the will to probate, and oil January 4, 1900,. the appellant duly qualified and letters were issued to him. … The appellant, however, did not qualify as executor, until January 5, 1900, and the motion was made on the twenty-seventh day of the same month.

People v. Beguelin

184 A.D. 759 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 13, 1918

In the year 1902 the State had recovered a judgment in ejectment against Ferris thereby establishing that he had no title to the premises which he could convey to the defendant. … He made the arrangement intelligently and deliberately as clearly appears. He derived certain advantages which to him at that time seemed adequate.

Matter of O'Reilly v. Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y.

2023 NY Slip Op 00957 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 21, 2023

response" after vaccination "due to preexisting immune conditions." … As the court there determined, that action "could clearly be characterized as misconduct, if not a crime.

State v. Abortion Information Agency, Inc.

37 A.D.2d 142 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1971

That case is applicable here, for the entire mode of operation so clearly established is that the defendants hire the hospital and make all arrangements with the hospital. … The discount then quite clearly is the equivalent of feé splitting.

Mancuso v. Town of Alden

2024 NY Slip Op 00521 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 2, 2024

Initially, defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in denying its motion with respect to the negligence cause of action because it was entitled to governmental immunity. … Although defendant asserts that, as a municipality, it generally may not be held liable for the design of the culvert ( see Gilberti v Town of Spafford , 117 AD3d 1547, 1548-1549 [4th Dept 2014]), plaintiff's complaint clearly

Under 21 v. City of New York

108 A.D.2d 250 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 7, 1985

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment reads in pertinent part: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of … Norwood would therefore clearly prevent the city from financing and supporting contractors who would receive city funds and then freely engage in invidious discrimination.

People v. Vecchio

228 A.D.2d 820 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 13, 1996

counsel so seriously compromises a defendant’s right to a fair trial, it will qualify as ineffective representation” (People v Hobot, 84 NY2d 1021, 1022 ). … Instead, defendant asserts that the question of whether a suppression motion has any merit is irrelevant because the critical nature of the seizure and the inculpatory evidence which flowed therefrom clearly required that

Keceli v. Yonkers Racing Corp.

155 A.D.3d 1014 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 29, 2017

To establish intentional discrimination, the “plaintiff must show that (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she was qualified to hold the position; (3) she was terminated from employment or suffered another adverse … To establish entitlement to summary judgment in a case alleging discrimination, the defendants must demonstrate either the plaintiff’s inability to establish every element of intentional discrimination, or, having offered

People v. Andrade

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 27, 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

Swierupski v. Korn

69 A.D.2d 632 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 30, 1979

Swierupski taking an equivalent alternative test which would qualify him as a police officer? "5. … Clearly the statute was intended to be more than a statement of platitudes.

Leach v. Chu

150 A.D.2d 842 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 4, 1989

Initially, we reject petitioners’ argument that the imposition of the tax violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause (US Const, art IV, § 2; 14th Amend). … Petitioners do not dispute that decedent’s apartment qualified as a permanent place of abode under Tax Law § 605 (b) (1) (B) (see, Stranahan v New York State Tax Commn., 68 AD2d 250 ).

IHG Harlem I LLC v. 406 Manhattan LLC

2024 NY Slip Op 00164 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 16, 2024

D'Addario ,the Court of Appeals used a cumulation of factors to assess whether the parties clearly "contracted around"' or "waived" CPLR 5001(a). … D'Addario , it cannot be said that the parties clearly waived the provisions of CPLR 5001 (a). Plaintiff has been denied use of its money for seven years.

IHG Harlem I LLC v. 406 Manhattan LLC

2024 NY Slip Op 00164 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 16, 2024

D'Addario ,the Court of Appeals used a cumulation of factors to assess whether the parties clearly "contracted around"' or "waived" CPLR 5001(a). … D'Addario , it cannot be said that the parties clearly waived the provisions of CPLR 5001 (a). Plaintiff has been denied use of its money for seven years.

Commissioners of State Insurance Fund v. Photocircuits Corp.

20 A.D.3d 173 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 9, 2005

Moreover, “[The Fund is] vested with certain sovereign powers and the mantle of the state’s sovereign immunities .... … However, in this case there is clearly a question of fact as to whether the Fund met its basic obligation to perform its duties to Photocircuits under the policy in a reasonable manner.

Guenther v. Ridgway Co.

187 A.D. 593 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 1919

That case, it would seem, extends the qualified privilege beyond the bounds hitherto set and observed by the courts. … The affidavits, however, on the contrary did not establish the truth of a single statement of the article. It did not prove that Guenther was prosecuted by anybody.

Honeoye Central School District v. Berle

72 A.D.2d 25 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 21, 1979

It is well established that "exemptions from taxation should be strictly construed and, if there be any ambiguity, 'all doubt must be resolved against the exemption’ ” (Matter of Aldrich v Murphy, 42 AD2d 385, 388 , quoting … The court added that courts favor tax exemption only where the purpose of the statute clearly indicates legislative intent to exempt.

Rivet v. Burdick

255 A.D. 131 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 28, 1938

January 31, .1938, the duly qualified electors of the town of Webb, a town of the second class, located in Herkimer county and in the Adirondack Park, authorized the town board to purchase several parcels of land in the town … Section 220 of article XIV of the Town Law indicates quite clearly that once a resolution is adopted at a special or biennial election the town board must take affirmative action to put the resolution into effect.