Case law

Hernandez

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 13, 2026

Nor can a plaintiff direct prosecutors to initiate a criminal action as such a decision is “immune from control or interference by citizen or court.” Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. … Plaintiff fails to state she is a qualified individual under the statute.

Kelly v. HUNTINGTON UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT

675 F. Supp. 2d 283 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 23, 2009

Legal Standard As the Second Circuit recently emphasized, “[i]t is established law in this Circuit that, ‘Regardless of the factual context, we have required a plaintiff alleging retaliation to establish speech protected … Beerman, 18 F.3d 147, 151 (2d Cir.1994) (“[T]he motive behind [plaintiffs] firing in his retaliation claim is clearly a question of fact.

In Re DES Cases

789 F. Supp. 552 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 13, 1992

One established basis for jurisdiction is consent. … The need for adaptation in this case is clearly indicated by the fact that, without it, these New York plaintiffs would likely be barred from recovering from these defendants in any court.

Turner v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 1, 2023

To establish a prima facie discrimination claim under the ADA, a plaintiff must show: (1) her employer was subject to the ADA; (2) she was disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (3) she was otherwise qualified to perform … Not only has Plaintiff not identified an existing vacant position where Defendant could have accommodated her, but she has also not established she was qualified for an alternative role.

Hamada v. State University of New York at Farmingdale

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

There is no dispute that Hamada is (1) a member of a protected class and (2) was qualified. … Hamada clearly implies — giving his Complaint all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff’s favor — that O’Sullivan knew of his HR complaint. Compl. ¶¶ 42–43.

Simon v. Philip Morris Inc.

124 F. Supp. 2d 46 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 7, 2000

These cases relied upon by defendants do not, however, establish a general conflicts of laws category because the question of whether a particular action qualifies for class status under New York law is a matter of discretion … Our cases make plain that the misconstruction must contradict law of the other State that is clearly established and that has been brought to the court’s attention ..We cannot conclude that any of the interpretations at issue

Russo v. Wyandanch Union Free School District

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 28, 2023

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, plaintiff must show that she: (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) is qualified for her position; (3) suffered an adverse employment action; and that … It is undisputed that plaintiff is a member of a protected class and was qualified for her position. Thus, only the third and fourth elements are at issue here.

Abbananto v. County of Nassau

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 3, 2022

The number of PCOs and PCOSs in the proposed class, approximately two hundred, clearly warrants the presumption of numerosity. … The adequacy prong also requires courts to ensure “that ‘class counsel is qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the litigation.’” Marisol A. v.

Baez

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 7, 2026

“To qualify as continuing, the claimed actions must not be discrete acts, but repeated conduct that occurs over a series of days or perhaps years.” Zoulas v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ., 400 F. … Instance Three concerns the school bell schedule, which is clearly not a matter of public concern. ECF No. 1 ¶ 10; cf. Cutaneo, 2024 WL 3362215, at *7 (E.D.N.Y.

Franzese v. United Health Care/Oxford

232 F. Supp. 3d 267 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 5, 2017

The movant bears the burden of establishing that there are no material facts that preclude judgment as a matter of law. See Huminski v. Corsones, 896 F.3d 53, 69 (2d Cir. 2004). … Oxford limited Bobby to one (1) box of the medication Xopenex at a time, and that the “onerous and irrational requirement to request a new authorization and delivery on a weekly basis, as opposed to monthly or quarterly, is clearly

United States v. Rubenstein

228 F. Supp. 3d 223 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 9, 2017

Ursery, 518 U.S. 267 , 116 S.Ct. 2135 , 135 L.Ed.2d 549 (1996) (establishing the two-prong inquiry in the context of the Double Jeopardy Clause); United States v. … As a general matter, the IRS’s assessment and attempt to collect interest in this case follows uniform Code provisions that are clearly designed to raise revenue.

In Re Ashanti Goldfields Securities Litigation

184 F. Supp. 2d 247 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 13, 2002

Other courts have established similar distinctions and definitions. For example, in BP N. Am. Petroleum v. … Based on subsequent events, Keatley’s statements clearly did not describe the full extent of the risk.

Vitrano v. N.A.R., Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 27, 2020

(See Opp. 3 (“The arbitration clause upon sufficient to establish the applicable choice of law.”). … These conditions must be “shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness.” Id.

Byrne v. American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, (A.S.P.C.A.)

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 3, 2025

Moreover, the Title VII claim is clearly the tail of this case, and the New York City law claims are the dog. 2 Defendants waste time trying to establish that they were reluctant to hire plaintiff, that there were better … To establish a prima facie case, a plaintiff must demonstrate that “(1) she was within the protected class; (2) she was qualified for the position; (3) she was subject to an adverse employment action; and (4) the adverse

Rizk v. Long Term Disability Plan of the Dun & Bradstreet Corp.

862 F. Supp. 783 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 8, 1994

Administration, *786 which had previously denied plaintiff coverage, 1 in order to determine whether plaintiff was totally disabled under the terms of the Plan and to identify alternative occupations for which plaintiff would be qualified … Rizk’s condition had a psychological overlay independent of her physical injury, he clearly stated that in his opinion her psychological difficulties were caused by physical pain.

Hettiarachchi v. County of Suffolk

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2020

Here, Plaintiff meets the minimal burden of showing that she was qualified for the roles she occupied in the DA’s Office. … intent, the causal relationship is not established.”); Forde v.

Dean v. Town of Hempstead

163 F. Supp. 3d 59 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 18, 2016

face and as applied to the plaintiffs, 14 id. ¶¶201-02; • (9) the plaintiffs should receive compensatory and punitive damages, as well as legal fees, id. ¶¶ 203-08; • (10) the conduct of the individual defendants violated clearly … established constitutional rights, and thus they are not entitled to qualified immunity, id. ¶¶ 209-12.

Coastal Communications Service, Inc. v. City of New York

658 F. Supp. 2d 425 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2009

In short, hiding forays into actual telecommunications regulation under the guise of rights-of-way regulation is clearly unacceptable under the TCA. … Mondello, 117 Fed.Appx. 782, 784 (2d Cir.2004) (“Plaintiffs’ complaint did not immunize them from all subsequent legal actions.”).

United States v. Pitera

795 F. Supp. 571 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 26, 1992

It notes, for example, that certain state courts have liberally construed capital statutes to permit guilty verdicts to qualify as aggravating convictions. E.g., Pardo v. … It only ensures that the class of persons eligible for death penalty consideration is no broader than clearly intended by Congress.

Roache v. Long Island Rail Road

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 17, 2020

foreman, id. ¶ 60; once for failing to prepare tasks for technicians when he was out sick, id. ¶ 61; and once for a reason not clearly specified in the amended complaint, id. ¶ 75. … Ed. 2d 668 (1973), a prima facie claim for discrimination is established by showing: (1) that the plaintiff is a member of a protected class; (2) that he was qualified for his position; (3) that he suffered an adverse employment