Case law

Kane v. City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 9, 2022

To establish a claim under Title II, “a plaintiff must demonstrate (1) that she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that she was excluded from participation in a public entity’s … animal establishes that she was “regarded as” having a disability.

Glidden Co. v. The Vermont

47 F. Supp. 877 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 8, 1942

By Section 1305 of that Act it was provided that a carrier shall be at liberty to surrender in whole or in part all or any of his rights and immunities or to increase any of his responsibilities and liabilities under the … This was not supported by any evidence, as the evidence clearly shows that the tanks were heated in the usual manner, by the gradual application of heat with the temperatures in general running between 90 degrees and 100

Ferrara v. Oakfield Leasing Inc.

904 F. Supp. 2d 249 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 9, 2012

Although Coral was a Subchapter S corporation whose income was taxable to Michael Jr., the Court agrees that the Defendant has cited no authority for the proposition that this sort of tax treatment immunizes shareholders … Passalacqua and this case is that the former was a diversity action alleging breach of contract, to which New York state law would clearly apply, whereas this case involves an attempt by plaintiffs to impose liability for

Duhs v. Capra

83 F. Supp. 3d 435 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 3, 2015

“Clearly Established Federal Law” “Clearly established federal law refers to the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of the Supreme Court’s decisions as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Howard v. … Bryant, 131 S.Ct. at 1157 n. 9. b) Unreasonable Application of Clearly Established Supreme Court Law The New York state courts unreasonably applied clearly established law by failing to objectively “evaluat[e] the statements

SiteTech Group Ltd. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Brookhaven

140 F. Supp. 2d 255 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 30, 2001

Although, a reviewing court would not normally “look far beyond [a local board’s] citing of aesthetics to find a valid basis for a local zoning decision, ... under the TCA, a reviewing court can find that aesthetics qualify … And, clearly, plaintiffs do not suggest that the evidence established that a monopole could never fail more substantially than “bendfing] a little bit,” such as collapsing or falling over.

United States v. Private Sanitation Industry Ass'n of Nassau/Suffolk, Inc.

899 F. Supp. 974 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 13, 1994

Thus, the Government has clearly established Ferrante’s repeated commission of acts constituting the New York State crime of Second Degree Bribery, thereby establishing the second predicate RICO act. 4 PSIA II, 811 F.Supp … The interstate commerce requirement is also clearly met. As noted in the November 25, 1992 Supplemental Declaration of Donald W.

Erving v. Virginia Squires Basketball Club

349 F. Supp. 709 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 19, 1972

In this court’s opinion Squires’ business activities in New York as summarized above amply satisfy the plaintiff’s burden of establishing that defendant is “doing business” here within the meaning of N.Y. … It is equally likely, if not more likely, that Pennsylvania law is the applicable law, in which case this forum would be as qualified as one in Virginia to decide this case.

Elyashiv v. Elyashiv

353 F. Supp. 2d 394 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 26, 2005

Her testimony was clearly articulated and well-reasoned, and her credentials are impeccable. Moreover, Mr. … Even the family dog was not immune from Mr. Elyashiv’s rage; in September 2001, after the dog misbehaved, Mr.

Panarello v. Northwell Health

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

In Forma Pauperis Upon review of Panarello’s renewed IFP motion, I find that Panarello is qualified by his financial status to commence this action without prepaying … 1915 of Title 28, a district court must dismiss an IFP complaint if the action is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune

Musto v. Transport Workers Union of America

339 F. Supp. 2d 456 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 27, 2004

That letter agreement did not even establish the cross-utilization scheme. … In this case, plaintiffs are claiming that no seniority system was established.

Trustees of Empire State Carpenters Annuity, Apprenticeship, Labor-Management Cooperation, Pension & Welfare Funds v. Allied Design & Construction, LLC

217 F. Supp. 3d 671 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 18, 2016

The award amounts for *676 interest, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and the arbitrator’s fee are also consistent with the contract’s terms, and nothing in the record suggests the award is “in contradiction of the clearly … The invoice satisfies the itemization requirement, and it is well established in this district that the filing fee qualifies as a recoverable cost. See, e.g., Labarbera v. ASTC Labs.

Robinson v. Kings County Family Court

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 25, 2025

“Even allegations of bad faith or malice cannot overcome judicial immunity.” Id. … Robinson should also state clearly what relief she is asking for.

Robinson v. Administrative Children Services

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 25, 2025

“Even allegations of bad faith or malice cannot overcome judicial immunity.” Id. … Robinson should also state clearly what relief she is asking for.

Croke v. County of Suffolk

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 21, 2021

Qualified Immunity Defendants contend that the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiffs’ malicious prosecution, excessive force, unlawful … As Plaintiffs’ constitutional claims are dismissed and Kirwin’s entry was lawful, Defendants’ qualified immunity defense is rendered moot. VI.

Town of Babylon v. FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY

790 F. Supp. 2d 47 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 13, 2011

As noted above, HERA clearly and specifically limits the power of courts to review the actions of the FHFA when acting as a conservator. … The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing three elements to confer standing.

New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. v. Village of Roslyn Estates

498 F. Supp. 922 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 28, 1979

Of course such activity is not absolutely immune from reasonable regulation. See, e. g., Hynes v. Oradell, supra, 425 U.S. 616 -17, 96 S.Ct. at 1758-59 , 48 L.Ed.2d 243 . … Ratner, supra, since their application clearly causes irreparable injury, see, e. g., Elrod v.

Grant v. Cafferri

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 4, 2019

Witness Immunity “It is well established that testifying witnesses, including police officers, are entitled to absolute immunity from liability under § 1983 based on their testimony.” Rolon v. Henneman, 389 F. … While Grant is clearly entitled to assistance of counsel in the pending criminal case, see U.S.

Marquez v. Prieston

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 6, 2022

Pauperis Application Upon review of Plaintiff’s declaration in support of his IFP application, together with his April 21, 2022 letter (ECF No. 15), the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified … It is well-established that Section 1983 “excludes from its reach merely private conduct, no matter how discriminatory or wrongful.” Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v.

Smith v. Robertson

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 7, 2025

an in forma pauperis action where it is satisfied that the action: (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 Title VII claim, “a plaintiff must show that (1) [s]he is a member of a protected class; (2) [s]he was qualified for the position [s]he held; (3) [s]he suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) the adverse

Leather's Best, Inc. v. Tidewater Terminal, Inc.

346 F. Supp. 962 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 19, 1972

The Court pointed out that a finding of negligence is not a finding of fact and therefore is not protected by the “clearly erroneous” standard of F.R. … Tidewater and that Tidewater was, in the language of Judge Dye in Berger ( 3 N.Y.2d at 703-704 , 171 N.Y.S.2d at 826 , 148 N.E.2d at 884 ). .... an agent ad hoc and, while acting pursuant to his authority, was entitled to “such immunities