Case law

Warner v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board

126 A.D.2d 956 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 23, 1987

Although this *957 was serious misconduct which violates a Board rule (9 NYCRR 4117.4 [n]) and justifies the determination herein (Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law § 309 [1]), there was no evidence that petitioner … benefited financially from the scheme in which he was a relatively minor character (see, Gleason v New York State Racing & Wagering Bd., 98 AD2d 964 ; see also, Matter of Swift v New York State Racing & Wagering Bd., 100

People ex rel. Finigan v. Board of Education

106 A.D. 101 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1905

Marino v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Cheektowaga

176 A.D.2d 1210 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 4, 1991

Board of Zoning Appeals, 45 NY2d 105, 108 ; see also, Human Dev. … Servs. v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, supra, at 139-140; Matter of Consolidated Edison Co. v Hoffman, 43 NY2d 598, 606 ; Matter of National Merritt v Weist, 41 NY2d 438 , 441).

Guterman v. Board of Education

80 A.D.3d 563 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 11, 2011

The defendants established the prima facie entitlement of the defendant Board of Education of the *564 City of New York (hereinafter the Board) to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the Board did not create … Dev., LLC, 69 AD3d 561, 562 [2010]; Hunter v Riverview Towers, 5 AD3d 249 [2004]). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]).

New York City Board of Education v. Simley

96 A.D.2d 947 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 29, 1983

As interpreted by the board, retention rights were restricted to the per-session teachers who were regularly employed in the board’s regular day school program. … Matter of CUNY-Hostos Community Coll, v State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 59 NY2d 69 ).

Krigos v. New York City Board of Education

247 A.D.2d 446 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 9, 1998

“In the absence of duty, there is no breach and without a breach there is no liability” (Pulka v Edelman, 40 NY2d 781, 782 ). … placed the onus of abiding by this rule upon the soccer league (see, Rothbard v Colgate Univ., 235 AD2d 675 ).

Vrooman v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Philipstown

298 A.D.2d 594 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 28, 2002

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Philipstown dated July 10, 2000, which annulled the petitioners’ building permit, the petitioners appeal

O'Leary v. Brown Seal Realty Corp.

33 A.D.2d 764 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 16, 1969

(Russo v. City of New York, 258 N. Y. 344 ; Gundershein v. Bradley-Mahony Coal Corp., 295 N. Y. 539 .) Concur — Capozzoli, Tilzer and Nunez, JJ.; Eager, J. … He could settle, continue, prosecute, change attorneys, or take any other step that is open to a plaintiff, and the erstwhile guardian could not interfere (Ream v. Ream, 281 N. Y. 395 ; McCarthy v.

Lachanski v. Schenectady County Board of Elections

10 A.D.3d 467 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 19, 2004

against the named candidates as well as the substituted candidates (hereinafter collectively referred to as respondents) seeking an order declaring the designating petitions invalid and enjoining respondent Schenectady County Board … We agree with all the parties, and Supreme Court, that the controlling authority under these circumstances is Matter of Lutfy v Gangemi ( 35 NY2d 179 [1974]).

Honig v. Board of Supervisors of Rensselaer County

31 A.D.2d 989 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 10, 1969

('See Davis v. Board of ¡Supervisors of County of Clinton•, 28 A D 2d 583, citing Swann v. Adams, 385 U. IS. 440.) … (See lannueci V. Board of Supervisors of County of Washington, 20 N ¡Y 2d 244, 252; Town of Greenburgh v. Board of Supervisors of County of Westchester, 57 Mise 2d 1008, 1011; Dobish v.

Alpert v. Board of Governors of the City Hospital

286 A.D. 542 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 2, 1955

It has been held that a regularly licensed physician cannot be denied the use of a public hospital hy the operation of unreasonable rules and • regulations (Findlay v. Board of Supervisors, 72 Ariz. 58 ; Johnson v. … It may next be supposed, arguendo, that respondent determined to exclude all physicians but one, as occurred in Findlay v. Board of Supervisors (supra).

Landmark Colony at Oyster Bay v. Board of Supervisors

113 A.D.2d 741 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 3, 1985

Board of Supervisors, 121 Misc 2d 23 ). … Board of Supervisors, 121 Misc 2d 23, 28 , supra).

Board of Education v. Buffalo Teachers Federation, Inc.

28 A.D.3d 1145 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 2006

MacRae v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board

48 A.D.2d 745 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 22, 1975

Upon the posting by petitioner of a $250 bond as required by the board, a hearing was held on the matter, and the board then made its findings which confirmed the judges’ ruling and also ordered the forfeiture of the bond … With such support as this, the board’s determination must be confirmed (Matter of Miller v Lomenzo, 43 AD2d 997 ). As to the forfeiture of the bond, however, we reach a contrary result.

New York State Labor Relations Board v. Hudson

267 A.D. 763 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 21, 1943

Espada 2001 v. New York City Campaign Finance Board

59 A.D.3d 57 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 30, 2008

State of New York v Uzzillia, 156 AD2d 261 [1989]), not, as petitioners would have it, back in 2001, when the Board denied the Committee matching funds. … is not arbitrary and capricious (see generally Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist.

AMBROSE, DENISE v. BROWN, JR., M.D., JAMES E.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 30, 2016

BROWN, JR., M.D., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, SUCHITRA KAVETY, M.D., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS AN OFFICER, AGENT AND/OR EMPLOYEE OF ASSOCIATES FOR WOMEN’S MEDICINE, JANE FIELDS, C.N.M., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS AN OFFICER, AGENT AND/OR EMPLOYEE … Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 NY2d 539, 545-546; Reynolds v Krebs, 81 AD3d 1269, 1271; Fleiss v South Buffalo Ry.

Govel v. Board of Education of City of Albany

267 A.D. 621 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 3, 1944

(Miller v. Board of Education, 291 N. Y. 25 ; Popow v. Central School District, 277 N. Y. 538 , affg. 251 App. Div. 906 ; Hoose v. Drumm, 281 N. Y. 54 .) … Y. 503 ; Miller v. Board of Education, supra.)

Board of Education v. Three Village Teachers' Ass'n

81 A.D.2d 820 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 4, 1981

Stahl v. Putnam County Board of Elections

10 A.D.3d 435 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 19, 2004

Under the circumstances, the proceeding was not timely “instituted” (Election Law § 16-102 [2]; see Matter of Wilson v Garfinkle, 5 AD3d 409 [2004]; Matter of Marino v Orange County Bd. of Elections, 307 AD2d 1011 [2003]; … Matter of Eckart v Edelstein, 185 AD2d 955 [1992]).