Case law

Yuen Shing Lee v. Ashcroft

216 F. Supp. 2d 51 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 15, 2002

Long-term residency and a personal claim or belief that one “owes allegiance” are clearly insufficient standing alone. … At a minimum, it appears that to qualify as a national, an individual must have demonstrated his or her allegiance by applying for citizenship. Hughes v.

NEW YORK STATE ASS'N, ETC. v. Carey

466 F. Supp. 487 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 28, 1979

We, therefore, made the decision to establish classes of combined handicaps but separated according to ages. Dr. … Sections 84.3(K) and 84.33(a) establish the obligation of the Board to provide to each qualified handicapped person a "free appropriate public education," which § 84.33(b) defines as the provision of regular or special education

Robinette Hardware Co. v. Square D Co.

498 F. Supp. 79 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 29, 1980

Such national and international news services appear to clearly qualify for protection under the laws relating to interstate commerce and, therefore, to be immune from State regulation. Id. … The well-established South Carolina rule that wholly interstate activity is outside the scope of that section must be applied.

Krasnyi Oktyabr, Inc. v. Trilini Imports

578 F. Supp. 2d 455 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 25, 2008

Plaintiff asserts that defendants have neither clearly defined the relevant market nor provided evidence of dominant share. … “Regardless of whether a lawsuit constitutes ‘improper means,’ parties who maintain civil suits are entitled to immunity for doing so under the Noerr-Penning-ton doctrine of immunity so long as the litigation is not a ‘sham

Young v. Cabrera

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 30, 2020

Qualified immunity shields officers from liability unless their conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Young to the ground would qualify as excessive force. Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity with respect to their alleged tackling of Mr. Young. C.

United States v. Morrison

596 F. Supp. 2d 661 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 26, 2009

In that regard, the DTF failed to issue tax exemption coupons for qualified Native Americans. … The rule governing their efforts, however, was clearly established at the outset: THE COURT [addressing defense counsel] You know as well as I do what entrapment by estoppel is, and you know it is a very limited defense.

United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. Meltzer

440 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 10, 2006

The mere fact that his attorney willingly approved the disclaimers cannot establish a defense of good faith reliance when the knowing misrepresentations clearly establish bad faith. Cf. S.E.C. v. … The “Bespeaks Caution” Doctrine Meltzer’s submissions stress above all else the fact that all of his e-mails were “replete with qualifiers and disclaimers” (quoted in full in the Background section, stipra) clearly warning

Ogando v. Napolitano

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 24, 2025

Complaint (“Compl.”), ECF 1, at 5.2 Plaintiff alleges that his credit score was not good enough to qualify for a mortgage on his own, so real estate attorney Goldberg, advised him to purchase through an “intermediary, … Here, each of these requirements have been established in this case with respect to the state court eviction proceeding.

In Re" Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation

580 F. Supp. 1242 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 16, 1984

stated that while “it is ... beyond question that if the present suit were in the form of an indemnity suit under the FTCA it would be barred,” since the suit was “a mutual fault collision case in admiralty under the long established … United States, 636 F.2d 580, 589 (D.C.Cir.1980) (“the Feres doctrine clearly lives, although its theoretical bases remain subject to serious doubt”); Veillette v.

Parker v. The State of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 1, 2022

LEGAL STANDARDS The Second Circuit has established a two-step procedure wherein the district court first considers whether plaintiff qualifies for in forma pauperis status, and then … they have waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity, or unless Congress has abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity.”

Kornit v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PLAINVIEW-OLD BETHPAGE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

534 F. Supp. 94 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 23, 1981

For plaintiff to prevail, the Taylor Law penalties must qualify as a debt within the meaning of this statute. *95 The federal garnishment provisions were enacted to prevent “predatory extensions of credit” that resulted from … The state’s interest in applying penalty deductions against striking employees is clearly different than the state’s [or federal] interest in safe-guarding the assets of debtors prior to judicial determination of ownership

Washington v. Griffin

142 F. Supp. 3d 291 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 4, 2015

Accordingly, this Court may grant his petition only if the state court’s adjudication of the claim “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme … established Supreme Court precedent.

Fernandez v. United States Postal Service

804 F. Supp. 448 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 1992

The plaintiff is clearly a member of a protected class, namely female and Hispanic. … However, even assuming that Fernandez made out a prima facie case of *463 discrimination, the Postal Service has clearly established non-discriminatory reasons for both her discharge in 1984 and the failure to employ her

Straker v. Metropolitan Transit Authority

333 F. Supp. 2d 91 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 9, 2004

“To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it. … NYCTA argues that Straker has not pled facts establishing that he is an “individual with a disability” under the Rehabilitation Act.

Bartel v. United States

664 F. Supp. 669 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 1, 1987

The government now concedes an inadvertent violation of section 552a(b) of the Act, but contends that the United States is immune from liability absent a showing that the violation was intentional or willful. … Vincent’s state of mind clearly presents a question of disputed material *675 fact precluding the entry of summary judgment. See, e.g., Zeller v.

A.J. ex rel. C.L.J. v. Board of Education

679 F. Supp. 2d 299 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 8, 2010

Clearly they do not since [A.J.] is progressing well academically. … Plaintiffs Have not Established by a Preponderance of the Evidence that A.J.

Stuart Force v. Facebook, Inc.

304 F. Supp. 3d 315 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 17, 2018

Plaintiffs' contention is flatly refuted by Facebook's briefing on the original motion to dismiss, which clearly argued that all of the offending content cited in Plaintiffs' complaint was "provided by another information … Moreover, like Plaintiffs' first amended complaint, Plaintiffs' new allegations regarding Facebook's claimed provision of "personnel" and "expert services" again "rely on content to establish causation and, by extension,

Daddino v. Valley Stream Central High School District

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2022

immunity. … supervisory liability or even argue that qualified immunity precluded application of Colon’s special tests for supervisory liability.

Atronic International, GMBH v. Sai Semispecialists of America

232 F.R.D. 160 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 18, 2005

Plaintiff further alleges that Judge Orenstein “misapplied cases under federal law,” misapprehended the law, and “was clearly motivated by his mistaken view.” … Given the claim and defenses asserted in this action, defendant may be prejudiced by restoring immunity to the inadvertently disclosed e-mails. See United States v.

Anilao v. Spota

918 F. Supp. 2d 157 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 25, 2013

In short, this is clearly a compelling situation for authorizing access to grand jury materials to plaintiffs who are attempting to vindicate the alleged violation of their civil rights in the aftermath of an Indictment that … individual County defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions in the *169 investigation phase; (3) plaintiffs have sufficiently pled Section 1983 claims against the individual County defendants for alleged