Case law

Jamison v. Bakke

247 F. Supp. 178 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 7, 1965

Rossell, D.C., 101 F.Supp. 481 ], supra, that the question of whether plaintiffs’ rights were violated was clearly put in issue, for the Court said, 101 F. … than plaintiffs’ are being retained in preference to plaintiffs is denied by defendants who in answering affidavits set forth the efforts they made to ascertain positions acceptable to plaintiffs for which plaintiffs were qualified

Ravenell v. Maimonides Medical Center

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 12, 2024

with the first category of qualifying disabilities above. … condition,” in which case “the requirements of this section relating to COVID-19 immunization shall be inapplicable only until such immunization is found no longer to be detrimental to such personnel member’s health.”

Gorman v. Polar Electro, Inc.

137 F. Supp. 2d 223 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 17, 2001

Polar emphasizes that the plaintiff also has not met his burden of setting forth sufficient facts to establish all the elements of the privilege. … The district court reviews such orders under the ‘clearly erroneous or contrary to law’ standard.” Thomas E. Hoar, Inc. v.

Moy v. Adelphi Institute, Inc.

866 F. Supp. 696 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 14, 1994

The allegations set forth in the Complaint clearly pass this test. … These assertions adequately establish a prima facie case of fraud.

United States v. Hammond

37 F. Supp. 2d 204 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 18, 1999

BASES FOR DOWNWARD DEPARTURE Congress established the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in part to eliminate “unwarranted sentencing disparities among [similarly situated] defendants.” 28 U.S.C. § 991 (b)(1)(B). … The Commission has failed to indicate which illnesses or physical burdens qualify for a downward departure.

A.M. ex rel. J.M. v. NYC Department of Education

840 F. Supp. 2d 660 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 17, 2012

.”); FFD at 22 (“The evidence clearly established that there is a variety of choices for [J.M.] concerning the school lunches.... … “It is enough for the plaintiff to suggest the existence of a plausible accommodation, the costs of which, facially, do not clearly exceed its benefits.” Id.

Whethers v. Nassau Health Care Corp.

956 F. Supp. 2d 364 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 8, 2013

Under McDonnell Douglas and its progeny, a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing: (1) she belonged to a protected class, (2) was qualified for the position she held or sought, and … “In order for employees in human resources positions to claim retaliation they need to first clearly establish that they were engaged in protected activities other than the general work involved in their employment.”

Sanabria v. City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 18, 2025

In the alternative, the defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the unlawful detention claim. (ECF No. 41 at 11–12.) … Accordingly, “the Court may not rule on qualified immunity at this stage of the litigation.” Bryant, 462 F. Supp. 3d at 262 (citing Myers, 819 F.3d at 633).

Skates v. Incorporated Village of Freeport

265 F. Supp. 3d 222 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 28, 2017

Therefore, to prevail" on a claim arising -under Section 1983, a plaintiff must establish: “(1) the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and its laws; (2) by a person acting under … To demonstrate a prima facie case of retaliation under the FMLA, the plaintiff must establish that:. “(1) he exercised rights protected under the FMLA; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment

Saunders v. Cavada

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 25, 2024

Detective Cavada is entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff’s false-arrest, false- imprisonment, and malicious-prosecution claims on qualified immunity grounds, because arguable probable cause supported plaintiff … In the alternative, Judge Marutollo determined that even if Detective Cavada lacked probable cause, he would still be entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. Id. at 17.

New York v. Smith

952 F. Supp. 2d 426 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 28, 2013

The Supreme Court has further concluded that the Civil Rights Act of 1866, “clearly indicates that Congress intended to protect a limited category of rights, specifically defined in terms of racial equality.” … To qualify for removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1443 (1), a defendant must satisfy a two-prong test. See Johnson, 421 U.S. at 220 , 95 S.Ct. 1591 .

Dundon v. United States

559 F. Supp. 469 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 18, 1983

ACCEUAL OF THE CLAIM It is well established that the United States is immune from suit unless it has consented to be sued. United States v . … Here, the decedent and his parents were directly and clearly informed of the presence of a tumor on or about August 18, 1975.

Scelza v. Porter

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 31, 2023

LEGAL STANDARDS The Second Circuit has established a two-step procedure wherein the district court first considers whether a plaintiff qualifies for in forma pauperis status, and then considers the merits of the … Any amended complaint shall be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order, shall clearly be labeled “Amended Complaint”, and shall bear the same docket number as this Order, 23-CV-5825(GRB)(JMW).

Byrd v. Long Island Lighting Co.

565 F. Supp. 1455 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 15, 1983

Defendants here contend that plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment. … qualified regular complement employee in the Electric Production Department of LIL-CO; and Third, the applicant who is the most senior qualified 1049 employee.

Squire v. New

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 5, 2023

First, “Section 1983 does not abrogate the Eleventh Amendment immunity of the States.” Id. Second, New York has not waived its immunity from suit. See Harrison v. New York, 95 F. … Supp. 3d 293, 314 (E.D.N.Y. 2015) (“It is well established that New York State has not waived its sovereign immunity from Section 1983 claims.”

Squire v. Brooks

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 5, 2023

First, “Section 1983 does not abrogate the Eleventh Amendment immunity of the States.” Id. Second, New York has not waived its immunity from suit. See Harrison v. New York, 95 F. … Supp. 3d 293, 314 (E.D.N.Y. 2015) (“It is well established that New York State has not waived its sovereign immunity from Section 1983 claims.”

Panarello v. Suffolk County

District Court, E.D. New York · May 13, 2025

Determining whether an applicant qualifies for IFP status is within the discretion of the district court. … It is well-established that this immunity extends to alter egos of the State including the State University of New York (“SUNY”) and its hospital. See e.g., Gasparik v. Stony Brook Univ., 296 F.

Islam v. Tirelli

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 10, 2024

Qualified Immunity A public official is immune from suit unless, inter alia, the plaintiff’s rights were “clearly established,” and it was “objectively unreasonable” for … If I were not dismissing plaintiff’s claims on the merits, I would dismiss them on qualified immunity grounds.

Gulickson v. Forest

290 F. Supp. 457 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 18, 1968

The privilege of agents to induce their principals to breach contracts is qualified; the agent must be acting in good faith within the scope of his authority. Navarro v. … Under the circumstances, the actions of the individual Trial Board members fit well within the bounds of immunity of agents for inducing the principal’s breach of contract.

Rupolo v. Oshkosh Truck Corp.

749 F. Supp. 2d 31 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 1, 2010

A witness may be qualified as an expert “by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” Fed. R.Evid. 702. … Ojalvo be found qualified to testify as an expert. This Court further rejects Defendant’s contentions that Dr.