Case law

Chillemi v. Town of Southampton

943 F. Supp. 2d 365 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 4, 2013

Toledo, 446 U.S. 635, 640 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980) (holding that defendant in civil rights case has burden of pleading defense of qualified immunity and plaintiff has no obligation to anticipate such a defense … Doctrine To state a cause of action under § 1985, a plaintiff must allege “(1) a conspiracy (2) for the purpose of depriving a person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or the equal privileges and immunities

Houston v. Department of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 9, 2025

dismiss sua sponte an in forma pauperis action if the Court determines it “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination in violation of the ADEA, a plaintiff must show: “(1) that she was within the protected age group, (2) that she was qualified for the position, (3) she experienced

Porter v. Family Service League

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 16, 2021

Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Application is Granted The Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified by his financial status to commence this action without prepayment of the filing … Any Amended Complaint shall be clearly labeled “Amended Complaint” and shall bear the same Docket Number as this Order, 21-CV-5120(JS)(ARL).

Cora v. Lebron

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 26, 2024

,” i.e., “the claim lacks an arguable basis in law” or “a dispositive defense clearly exists on the face of the complaint.” … The absolute judicial immunity of the court and its members “is not overcome by allegations of bad faith or malice,” nor can a judge “be deprived of immunity because the act [she] took was in error . . . or was in excess

Nassau Sports v. Peters

352 F. Supp. 867 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 12, 1972

Metropolitan’s affidavit opposing remand more than adequately meets its burden of establishing that its principal place of business is not in New York at the present time. … Admittedly, the law firm of Lewis, Siegel & Wood, registered agent for Metropolitan, has its office there but Metropolitan’s offices are separate and apart from the law firm’s offices and clearly indicated as such.

Packer v. Raging Capital Management, LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 20, 2019

However, a fuller reading of the decision by Judge Marrero does not support the share- immunization argument formulated by defendants. … Despite defendants’ suggestions to the contrary, Master Fund clearly is a beneficial owner of the shares for the purposes of this analysis.

Herman v. Wieber

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 28, 2022

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity is available to officials” in a Section 1983 action “so long as their actions do not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional … Even in the absence of probable cause, a police officer is entitled to qualified immunity where (1) her conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Manning v. The Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. New York · May 16, 2025

immunity. … Notably, the Commissioner does not raise qualified immunity in its motion for judgment on the pleadings and Manning does not make any other persuasive arguments in the submission. (See Def.’s Mot. J.

Brenord v. Catholic Medical Center of Brooklyn and Queens, Inc.

133 F. Supp. 2d 179 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 5, 2001

F) The record clearly reflects that -Mrs. Brenord was screened in accordance with this procedure. On arrival at the Emergency Room of St. Mary’s Hospital, Mrs. Brenord was triaged. … Mahmoud qualifies as an expert under the factors set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 597 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 , 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993) and Kumho Tire Co. v.

Kern v. Brookhaven National Laboratory

293 F. Supp. 2d 214 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 21, 2003

Once this reason is established, the presumption of discrimination arising with the establishment of the prima facie case drops from the matter. See St. Mary’s Honor Center v. … Plaintiff has clearly established that he falls within the class of individuals protected by the ADEA — he was fifty-nine years old when he left the Brookhaven Lab.

United States v. Hogan

122 F. Supp. 2d 358 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 20, 2000

Here, the evidence clearly established that the house at 406 South 9th Street was not the defendant’s dwelling place, nor anyone else’s dwelling place for that matter, and there is no evidence that it was ever occupied by … The seizure and search of the briefcase therefore does not qualify as a lawful search incident to arrest.

Soybel v. The City of New York

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

Carson, 52 F.3d 1173 (2d Cir. 1995), which they claimed clearly forecloses disgorgement as a remedy in this case. (Id. 4-7.) … Disgorgement Would Not Constitute a Forward-Looking Remedy in This Case The issue then becomes whether ordering disgorgement from defendants would qualify as forward-looking if the allegations of the Amended Complaint

Woodson v. Nassau County

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

The determination of whether an applicant qualifies for IFP status is within the discretion of the district court. DiGianni v. Pearson Educ., 10-CV-0206, 2010 WL 1741373, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. … A policy or custom may be established by any of the following: (1) a formal policy officially endorsed by the municipality; (2) actions taken by government officials responsible for establishing

Harper

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 30, 2026

Judicial Immunity It is well-established that judges have absolute judicial immunity from suit for judicial acts performed in their judicial capacities. See Mireles v. … However, as to LOGS, privity has not been established.

Equal Opprtunity Employment Commission v. United Health Programs of America, Inc.

213 F. Supp. 3d 377 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2016

(a) Qualification In establishing qualification for a position, claimants must show that they were qualified for their positions at the time their employment ended. See Kovaco v. … Here, defendants contend that none of the claimants were qualified.

Padilla v. New York City Department of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · May 16, 2025

sovereign immunity turned out to be incorrect, at least in this context. … In such circumstances, the States “simply have no immunity left to waive or abrogate.” Id.

Bell v. Nassau Intrim Finance Authority

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2019

In Forma Pauperis Application Upon review of Plaintiff’s declarations in support of the application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified to commence … Congress has not abrogated Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims under Section 1983, nor has New York waived immunity for such claims. See, e.g., Sherman v.

Scodari v. Alexander

69 F.R.D. 652 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 15, 1976

The government has advanced a number of grounds in its motion to dismiss this action, including absence of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of standing, sovereign immunity, and failure to state a claim upon which relief … These regulations clearly set forth the responsibilities and rights of the government, and they quite arguably are intended to benefit and to lend protection to informants as well.

Grimes v. Sil

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 29, 2020

Feb. 3, 2020) (“[A] party’s mere pro se status, or search for counsel, does not alone establish good cause for a failure to effect timely service.”). … “‘[A]s a general rule, state governments may not be sued in federal court unless they have waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity,’ or unless Congress has ‘abrogate[d] the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity when acting

VIVAR v. Senkowski

335 F. Supp. 2d 344 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 9, 2004

Thus, a federal court may only grant habeas relief where the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was not only erroneous, but objectively unreasonable. Id. at 409 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 . … Under New York law, “[t]he People were required to establish that defendant possessed a loaded firearm, and since the evidence before the jury presented an issue of fact as to whether the weapon in question so qualified,