Case law

Tigano, III v. United States of America

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 22, 2021

A prosecutor who engages in such activities is protected only by qualified immunity. Sclafani v. Spitzer, 734 F. Supp. 2d 288, 296 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) (citing Van de Kamp, 129 S. Ct. at 861). … IIED Plaintiff clearly advances a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Ingram v. Nassau Health Care Corporation

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 13, 2020

Thus, any slander or defamation claims concerning the alleged false statements that led to Plaintiff’s termination are clearly time-barred. … Oct. 21, 2011) (collecting cases and explaining that “the principle of absolute immunity in [the context of statements to the unemployment insurance board] is well-established”).

Attallah v. New York College of Osteopathic Medicine

94 F. Supp. 3d 448 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 27, 2015

claim under Section 1983, “a plaintiff must allege (1) that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law, and (2) that such conduct deprived the plaintiff of a right, privilege, or immunity … It would thus be clearly *459 inappropriate for the district court to retain jurisdiction over the state law claims when there is no basis for supplemental jurisdiction.”); Karmel v.

Water's Edge Habitat, Inc. v. Pulipati

837 F. Supp. 501 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 1993

Because respondents cannot establish either prong of the Court’s test, this action must be remanded to the State court. I. … Accordingly, if the activity in question “does not on its face discriminate in terms of race, appellants claim of violation of the equal protection clause does not qualify their cause for removal.” Chestnut v.

Avant v. Miranda

District Court, E.D. New York · May 18, 2021

Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Application is Granted Upon review of Plaintiff’s declaration in support of the application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified … action is frivolous as a matter of law when, inter alia, it is based on an “indisputably meritless legal theory” or when it “lacks an arguable basis in law . . ., or [when] a dispositive defense clearly

Porush v. Lemire Ex Rel. Estate of Lemire

6 F. Supp. 2d 178 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 20, 1998

“manifest disregard” standard is extremely limited: The error must have been obvious and capable of being readily and instantly perceived by the average person qualified to serve as an arbitrator. … The party seeking to vacate an arbitration award bears the burden of establishing one of the grounds for relief and the showing required to avoid summary confirmation of the award is high.

Cyberchron Corp. v. Calldata Systems Development, Inc.

831 F. Supp. 94 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 30, 1993

Grumman holds Cyberchron responsible to deliver qualified units on August 22, 1990 in accordance with the terms of the reference a) Purchase Order as clarified by the reference d) Grumman letter. … In this ease, the Court finds that the plaintiff established all three elements of its promissory estoppel claim.

Costello v. St. Francis Hospital

258 F. Supp. 2d 144 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 16, 2003

(3) she was otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of her job, with or without reasonable accommodation; and (4) she suffered adverse employment action because of her disability. … Although the term “sexually suggestive” is not defined in the Hospital’s policy, chocolates in the shape of male genitalia and a female breast clearly could legitimately be so labeled by administrators at St.

Queens County Republican Committee Ex Rel. Maltese v. New York State Board of Elections

222 F. Supp. 2d 341 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 21, 2002

The Fifth Congressional District qualifies as such an office. … Clearly, the Court finds the rule in Jones inapplicable to this case.

Butto v. Collecto Inc.

290 F.R.D. 372 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 29, 2013

Defendant argues that Class B clearly encompasses individuals from whom Defendant actually procured collection fees and Plaintiff has never paid such fee. Id. … The amended definition clearly still encompasses only those individuals from whom Defendant actually collected a fee.

United States v. Edwin B. Stimpson Co.

155 F. Supp. 289 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 27, 1957

“Whether a delivery or series of deliveries qualifies for a quantity *292 premium shall be established on the basis of the actual weight of brass mill scrap determined at the buyer’s receiving point. … The Regulation, when read as a whole, indicates clearly that no premium may be charged where the seller’s shipping point and the buyer’s receiving point coincide.

Lipani v. Bohack Corp.

368 F. Supp. 282 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 21, 1973

The pertinent portions of the collective bargaining agreement 1 concerning *284 vacation rights and sick leave allowances clearly indicate in Article X(A), (B), (F), (G), (H) and (I) that employees were entitled to vacation … In that case the collective bargaining agreement provided that an employee must render 110 days of compensated service in the previous calendar year in order to qualify for vacation rights.

Viking Travel, Inc. v. Air France

462 F. Supp. 28 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 2, 1978

Therefore, all conduct which was no more than the kind of conduct the C.A.B. had approved was immune from the antitrust laws. … A travel agent such as Viking clearly is a “ticket agent” within the terms of the statute. 18 .

Aqua Harvesters, Inc. v. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 9, 2021

“The plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing these elements.” Id. … “Where, as here, a case is at the pleading stage, the plaintiff must clearly allege facts demonstrating each element.” Id. (internal quotation and alteration omitted).

Volpe v. Ryder

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 2, 2023

And finally, Defendants argue that the “Collective Knowledge” and Qualified Immunity doctrines contribute to and govern over the reasonable suspicion leading to Defendant Ryder’s conducting the test. … In light of the disposition above, the Court need not address qualified immunity.

Cityspec, Inc. v. Smith

617 F. Supp. 2d 161 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 18, 2009

the regulation governing the boiler inspection competency examination provides that those wishing to take the test be, inter alia, “actually in the employ of the State of new York, a duly authorized insurance company or a qualified … Plaintiffs argue that they have alleged the existence and violation of a clearly defined Constitutionally protected interest, ie., the right to engage in a chosen profession.

Lissade

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 24, 2026

They argue that each of these claims fails as a matter of law and, alternatively, that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the claims for false arrest, excessive force, and denial of medical attention. … Likewise, because it grants summary judgment for Defendants on the merits, the Court does not reach Defendants’ alternative argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Price v. City of New York

797 F. Supp. 2d 219 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 22, 2011

Retaliation Judge Bloom recommended dismissal of Plaintiffs retaliation claim, finding that Plaintiff failed to state facts that establish a causal connection between his protected activity and his claim of retaliation under … Information Required by ADEA Regulations Plaintiffs Intake Questionnaire clearly contains the name of the charged party and an allegation of discrimination. (Intake Questionnaire.)

Oliver v. Yaphank Correctional Facility

District Court, E.D. New York · May 7, 2020

Pauperis Application Upon review of Plaintiff’s declaration in support of the application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified … Because the Complaint is devoid of any allegations sufficient to establish any personal involvement by Sgt. Doe, Lt.

Special Touch Home Care Services, Inc. v. United States

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 7, 2022

Sovereign Immunity In suits against the United States, sovereign immunity operates as a limitation on subject matter jurisdiction. … Thus, “plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that [plaintiffs] claims fall within an applicable waiver” of sovereign immunity. Makarova v, United States, 201 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir. 2000). Un- der 28 U.S.C.