Case law

Small v. (Sheriff) N.C.C.C.

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 13, 2024

LEGAL STANDARDS The Second Circuit has established a two-step procedure wherein the district court first considers whether a plaintiff qualifies for IFP status, and then considers the merits … Any amended complaint shall be clearly labeled “Amended Complaint” and shall bear the same docket number as this Order, 24-CV-07385(GRB)(JMW).

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.

Perez v. Hawk

302 F. Supp. 2d 9 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 10, 2004

established constitutional right for which the federal official does not have immunity. … However, medical malpractice is clearly not a constitutional violation.

Douglas

District Court, E.D. New York · May 22, 2026

established constitutional rights. … The combined malicious conduct of these individual Defendants . . . strips them of the defense of Qualified Immunity.

Alexander A. v. Novello

210 F.R.D. 27 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 12, 2002

The “eligibility list” contains all children certified as qualified by PACC. See id. 1134 . … Clearly, this cannot be characterized as sufficient.

Liss v. Nassau County

425 F. Supp. 2d 335 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 4, 2006

Accordingly, the defen-dantsl motion to dismiss because the plaintiff was not a “qualified individual with a disability” is denied. C. … Thomas, Inc., 831 F.2d 1184, 1190 (2d Cir.1987) (‘Were state law to erect such a bar, it would clearly run afoul of the Supremeey Clause.”); Worthington v.

Sherman v. Black

510 F. Supp. 2d 193 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 26, 2007

Also, Sherman has not established that he has no other adequate remedy available. … In addition, the extent to which Title II of the ADA abrogates sovereign immunity has been the subject of recent case law. See United States v.

Santos-Gonzalez v. Reno

93 F. Supp. 2d 286 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 18, 2000

The laws of New York establish jurisdiction over persons located within the state. See Eltayeb, 950 F.Supp. at 99 ; N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 301. … Such a charge of "turnstile jumping” qualifies as a crime of moral turpitude and can subject an alien to deportation. See Mojica v. Reno, 970 F.Supp. 130, 137 (E.D.N.Y.1997). 3 .

Williams v. Mangano

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 11, 2021

It is clearly established that “a search must be reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.” United States v. … Accordingly, Bourguignon is not entitled to qualified immunity for this claim.

United States v. Cohan

628 F. Supp. 2d 355 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 24, 2009

Particularity is the requirement that the warrant must clearly state what is sought. … Callahan, —■ U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 808, 822 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (“An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity [from suit] where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth

Vinokur v. Sovereign Bank

701 F. Supp. 2d 276 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 22, 2010

Defendant’s Legitimate, Nondiscriminatory Reason Even assuming, arguendo, that plaintiff has established a prima facie case of age or national origin discrimination, defendant clearly satisfies its burden of production at … Pretext Because defendant has clearly articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for plaintiffs discharge, plaintiff must establish, through admissible evidence, a triable issue of fact as to whether defendant’s

Arena v. Kaplan

952 F. Supp. 2d 468 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 8, 2013

To the extent the Petitioner challenges the admission of testimony regarding uncharged “bad acts” under a New York state evidentiary rule, this argument does not implicate clearly established federal law and thus, is not … Again, a state court “unreasonably applies” clearly established law when it identifies the correct legal principle from Supreme Court jurisprudence, but unreasonably applies the principle to the case before it.

Washington v. United States Tennis Ass'n

290 F. Supp. 2d 323 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 29, 2003

At that time, wild cards were awarded by the U.S.T.A. to players who did not qualify on ranking alone for the U.S. Open. … Open (or its qualifying rounds) than Washington. In every year except 1998, he received a wild card.

United States v. Chartier

775 F. Supp. 582 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 11, 1991

The Fourth Circuit reversed this finding as “clearly erroneous”, and held the defendant to be a “career offender” as a matter of law. … In rejecting the District Court’s reasoning, the Circuit Court stated: “This finding is clearly erroneous.

Colondres v. Scoppetta

290 F. Supp. 2d 376 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 18, 2003

, the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, section 2, and the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.” … In addition, before accepting the judgment, plaintiff received a Notice of Lien which clearly and explicitly informed her of the applicable law and her obligation to repay the City for the public assistance she received.

Keyer v. Civil Service Commission of City of New York

397 F. Supp. 1362 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 29, 1975

It applies to “[ejvery person” whose “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” have been denied him under color of State law. Sampson v. … “At the time of appointment, a candidate must qualify for appointment as Special Patrolman by the New York City Police Department.

Beckham v. Miller

366 F. Supp. 3d 379 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 7, 2019

In determining what constitutes an "unreasonable application of[ ] clearly established Federal law," a federal habeas court should ask whether the state court's application of clearly established federal law was "objectively … I also agree with the Appellate Division that the claim is without merit and does not constitute an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Rivas Morales v. Nassau County Corrections

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 13, 2021

Upon review of the declarations accompanying Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s financial status qualifies him to commence this action without prepayment of the filing … 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.”

Alexander v. Westbury Union Free School District

829 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 4, 2011

The plaintiff argues that “the mere existence of a sexual harassment complaint procedure does not immunize the defendant.” DE [56-14] at 7 (citing Crisonino v. … Qualified Immunity: Because all of the claims against the District Defendants are dismissed on separate grounds, I decline to consider their arguments in favor of qualified immunity.

Turyants v. City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 18, 2020

A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if “(1) the defendant’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or (2) it was objectively … “In the false arrest context, ‘[a]n arresting officer is entitled to qualified immunity . . . even when probable cause to arrest does not exist, if he can establish that there was arguable probable cause to arrest.’”