Case law

Williams v. Lafler

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 5, 2025

Even where subject matter is established, the Court may be divested of subject matter jurisdiction in certain circumstances, such as where the defendant is immune from suit. See, e.g., Mireles v. … Such acts are clearly judicial in nature, performed in their respective judicial capacities, and are shielded by absolute judicial immunity.

Brower v. Continental Airlines, Inc.

62 F. Supp. 2d 896 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 29, 1999

In order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA 2 , Brower must prove: (1) Continental is subject to the ADA; (2) that she is disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (3) that she is otherwise qualified … Because Brower cannot establish a prima facie case of retaliation, that claim is dismissed. V.

Transport Limousine of Long Island, Inc. v. Port Authority

571 F. Supp. 576 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 20, 1983

Indeed, Transport does not clearly define “the relevant market in which the defendant’s actions are to be appraised.” Mullis v. … We find that the conduct of charging such fee is clearly within the narrowed state-action exemption of City of Lafayette, supra.

Hall v. Salaway

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 3, 2021

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 … It is well-established that New York State has not waived its sovereign immunity from Section 1983 claims. Mamot v. Bd. of Regents, 367 F. App’x 191, 192 (2d Cir. 2010) (summary order).

Knights v. City University of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 6, 2020

immunity. … But, because these constitutional rights have been clearly established for many years, see Faghri, 621 F.3d at 99, Patterson, 370 F.3d at 330, they cannot avail themselves of this affirmative defense. See Harlow v.

The Toledo

30 F. Supp. 93 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 13, 1939

It is necessary to keep clearly in mind the two different capacities in which libellant sues, and I will, therefore, consider -them separately in their order. ' The charterparty, which was on the Government-New York Produce … The evidence clearly shows that the ship was not seaworthy at these times.

Ahmed v. T.J. Maxx Corp.

103 F. Supp. 3d 343 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 11, 2015

Rather, only those employees whose “primary duty is ordinary production work or routine, recurrent or repetitive tasks cannot qualify for exemption as an executive.” 29 C.F.R. § 541.106 . … The Court does not find Judge Lindsay’s conclusion to be “clearly erroneous” because it is well-supported by the record. See Mobil Shipping & Transp.

Gardner v. City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 27, 2021

“In a false arrest case, an arresting officer [is] entitled to qualified immunity from a suit for damages if he can establish that there was arguable probable cause to arrest.” Guerrero v. Scarazzini, 274 F. … Because the facts surrounding the arrest are “sharply disputed,” the court has no basis to resolve the issue of the officers’ qualified immunity as a matter of law. Weyant, 101 F.3d at 858.

Marshak v. Reed

229 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 1, 2002

While the Ninth Circuit’s language can be read, as Reed argues, as expressing the opinion that, whatever rights FPI may have to use “Platters” with qualifying language, FPI has no right to use the name “The Platters” without … qualifying language, the language can also be read as leaving open the possibility, however remote, that FPI can establish a common law trademark right to the name “The Platters”.

Henry v. Nannys for Grannys Inc.

86 F. Supp. 3d 155 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 20, 2015

Whether Plaintiffs qualify as exempt is a matter to be fleshed out during discovery. … This statement clearly constitutes a typographical error as the next two paragraphs argue in support of Henry and Bakare’s retaliation claims. (See Opp’n Mem. 23-24, ECF No. 22.)

Sacher v. Village of Old Brookville

967 F. Supp. 2d 663 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 4, 2013

immunity for actions taken as members of Village boards. … Due Process Claim In order to establish a procedural due process violation, a plaintiff must “(1) identify a property right, (2) establish that governmental action with respect to that property right amounted to a deprivation

Reyes v. Phoenix Beverages, Inc.

207 F. Supp. 3d 206 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 15, 2016

, or park his car and walk from one establishment to another. … According to Plaintiff, the amount he had to walk between establishments varied depending on the size of the territory and the proximity of each account establishment to another. (Pl. 56.1 ¶ 4.)

Resource N.E. of Long Island, Inc. v. Town of Babylon

80 F. Supp. 2d 52 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 3, 2000

Finally, Schaffer claims that, to the extent a Section 1983 violation is alleged, he is protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Because the Court is dismissing all of Resource’s Section 1983 claims, the arguments by Defendants Schaffer, Jacob, and Kluesener that they are protected against such claims by the doctrine of qualified immunity are moot.

United States v. Schwimmer

738 F. Supp. 654 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 31, 1990

Mariani, 851 F.2d 595 (2d Cir.1988), the Court of Appeals declined to follow McDaniel to the extent that it “can be read to foreclose the prosecution of an immunized witness where his immunized testimony might have tangentially … Clearly, this Court has the authority to call witnesses to supplement the record. Fed.R.Evid. 614.

Barnes v. County of Nassau

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 9, 2023

Upon review of the declaration accompanying Plaintiff’s IFP application, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s financial status qualifies him to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee. … Second, “the conduct complained of must have deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” Id.; see also Snider v.

Rinaldi v. Quality King Distributors, Inc.

29 F. Supp. 3d 218 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 26, 2014

Under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework, the plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. Reeves v. … The only inquiry as to Rinaldi’s prima facie case is whether she can establish that she was qualified to perform the essential functions of her job, with or without a reasonable accommodation. B.

Pico v. BOARD OF ED., ISLAND TREES UNION FREE SCH.

474 F. Supp. 387 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 2, 1979

. § 1983 , because the board is a municipal corporation and its members are municipal officers, all of whom are immune from suit under § 1983 under Monroe v. … Here, the Island Trees School Board removed certain books because it viewed them as vulgar and in bad taste, a removal that clearly was content-based.

Ruben Condenser Co. v. Aerovox Corp.

7 F. Supp. 168 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 28, 1934

No voids in the unit are clearly shown. … Wide variances would deprive them cf immunity.

Parikh v. New York City Transit Authority

681 F. Supp. 2d 371 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 2, 2010

To establish a prima facie case for failure to promote, a plaintiff must show: “(1) [he] is a member of a protected class; (2)[he] applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants; (3)[he] … Further, plaintiffs discrimination charge makes no mention of claims for intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress and thus clearly does not specify “the nature of the claim,” as required by Section 1212.

Platsky v. Studeman

829 F. Supp. 567 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 16, 1993

[W]e have said that to be “adversely affected or aggrieved ... within the meaning” of a statute, the plaintiff must establish that the injury he complains of (his aggrievement, or the adverse effects upon him) falls within … In situations where there has been no illegal activity, where there’s no indication that's able to have been created, no indictments have been brought down where these organizations are clearly functioning within the limits