Case law

Braswell

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 15, 2025

“Section 1983 itself creates no substantive rights; it provides only a procedure for redress for the deprivation of rights established elsewhere.” Thomas v. … If Braswell chooses to file an amended complaint, he shall: (1) do so within thirty (30) days from the date of this Memorandum and Order; (2) clearly label it “Amended Complaint”; (3) and include only the docket number

Building Industry Fund v. Local Union No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

992 F. Supp. 162 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 8, 1996

Nor have they identified any facts which clearly point to JIB’s involvement. … Because there are no sub-sections of paragraph 26 beyond (d), this is clearly an error.

Restrepo v. McElroy

354 F. Supp. 2d 254 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 18, 2005

Pre-trial custody, which is later credited toward time served, has not clearly been held to count toward establishing the section 212(c) five-year bar. In Buitrago-Cuesta v. … To qualify for such relief, an alien was required to show that he or she: (1) was a lawful permanent resident of the United States; (2) had an unrelinquished domicile of seven consecutive years; and (3) had not committed

Lanning v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority

176 F.R.D. 132 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 13, 1997

Clearly, plaintiffs’ cause of action under § 1983 accrued without the previous two-year period from the date of the filing of their instant complaint. … The 1996 applicants clearly are not future applicants — they have already applied and allegedly been harmed by SEPTA’s discriminatory 12 minute, 1.5 mile run.

Davis v. Shalala

883 F. Supp. 828 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 1995

qualify for Title II disability benefits. … Rin-gler’s evaluation does not establish that Davis was disabled prior to June 30, 1991. This contention misses the point, however.

Hall v. New York City Department of Transportation

701 F. Supp. 2d 318 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 30, 2010

Although a failure-to-promote is clearly an adverse employment action, plaintiff has failed to proffer any evidence that a permanent position was available or that she ever took a civil service examination to be qualified … was not “qualified” for the position.

United States v. Knauer

635 F. Supp. 2d 203 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 14, 2009

However, section 7.45 clearly applies only to Everglades National Park. See Lesoeur v. … The state law definition of “commercial fishing” clearly conflicts with the definitions of “fish” and “fishing” in section 1.4(a) and cannot apply here.

Wright v. Terrinoni

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

. § 1915(e)(2)(B), a district court must dismiss an IFP action if the complaint “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 … To establish a Title VII claim, a plaintiff must show that he is a member of a protected class, that he was qualified for the position, and that he suffered an adverse employment action under circumstances giving rise to

Ingrassia v. Health & Hospital Corp.

130 F. Supp. 3d 709 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 8, 2015

Furthermore, Plaintiffs late service of the Complaint on HHC did not prejudice it in any way; HHC and the other Defendants clearly had notice of the action, based on Plaintiffs filing of a notice of claim against the City … Such conduct, on its own, is insufficient to establish an adverse employment action for purposes of an ADEA or Title VII claim. See Kurian v.

United States v. King

991 F. Supp. 77 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 7, 1998

Agents are not required to resort to measures that will be clearly unproductive. … It is well-established that statements alleged to be intentionally false must be known to be false at the time they were made.

Matin v. North Shore Towers Security

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 24, 2025

An action is “frivolous” when either: (1) “the ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless,’ such as when allegations are the product of delusion or fantasy”; or (2) “the claim is ‘based on an indisputably meritless legal … denied, 565 U.S. 1259 (2012) (“[T]o establish municipal liability under § 1983, a plaintiff must prove that action pursuant to official municipal policy caused the alleged constitutional injury.”

Saltzman v. United States

750 F. Supp. 61 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 13, 1988

While plaintiff’s experts are highly qualified, I do not credit their valuations of the Bolshoi films. … The absence of such documentation would clearly have had an adverse effect on commercial value. 10 . Oswald was the only one of plaintiffs experts who did not prepare a written evaluation.

Braswell

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 15, 2025

“Section 1983 itself creates no substantive rights; it provides only a procedure for redress for the deprivation of rights established elsewhere.” Thomas v. … If Braswell chooses to file an amended complaint, he shall: (1) do so within thirty (30) days from the date of this Memorandum and Order; (2) clearly label it “Amended Complaint”; (3) and include only the docket number

Riddick v. Christine

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 8, 2021

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 … Bell, 592 F.3d 121, 127 (2d Cir. 2010) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted); and (2) the conduct complained of “must have deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws

United States v. Agnello

101 F. Supp. 2d 108 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 7, 2000

persons and the community, substantially for the reasons he stated on the record on March 17, 2000, based on the charges in the indictment as supplemented by the government proffers, and the evidence received at the hearing establishing … The defendant suggested that the government’s proffer of information concerning the bribery of the juror could have been derived from immunized testimony the defendant gave before a grand jury investigating the incident,

John Hancock Life Insurance v. Perchikov

553 F. Supp. 2d 229 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 17, 2008

Accordingly, the Goldstein decedent clearly did not procure the insurance policy for any purpose independent of a scheme to defraud the insurance company. … When analyzing whether a particular misrepresentation is material, a court may look to evidence in the form of sworn affidavits of a qualifying underwriting agent who testified that the insurer would not have issued the particular

Grumman Corp. v. LTV Corp.

527 F. Supp. 86 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 14, 1981

Clearly, even more important than that industry recognition in this instance is consumer recognition. The Navy defines the market for carrier-suitable aircraft. As stated by Judge Real in Northrop v. … It would not be independently qualified to produce Navy aircraft. See Northrop Corp. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., supra, 498 F.Supp. at 1115 .

Small v. General Nutrition Companies, Inc.

388 F. Supp. 2d 83 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 25, 2005

The court also notes that, contrary to plaintiffs argument, a plaintiffs showing that he “live[s] in close proximity” to the public accommodations he is challenging is clearly insufficient to establish standing under Title … While having to divert scarce resources away from other organizational activities as a result of the challenged conduct may qualify as an injury that confers standing, Havens Realty Corp. v.

New York State Citizens' Coalition for Children v. Carrion

31 F. Supp. 3d 512 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 17, 2014

There are thirty-three conditions that must be included in a state’s plan in order to qualify for federal funding. § 671(a). … Thus, Gonzaga invoked important aspects of our federalist system and established “that if a state is to be subject to private suits whenever it fails to meet a funding condition, Congress should clearly put the state on notice

Toth v. New York City Department of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 21, 2024

June 25, 2018) (“[E]ven had Chioke sued the DOE under § 1983 . . . the DOE would be immune from suit under [Monell]). … For a plaintiff to establish a prima facie violation under these Acts, the plaintiff: must demonstrate (1) that [he] is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that the defendant[] [is]