Case law

Todd v. Park City 3 & 4 Apartments, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 29, 2021

“It is well established that the submissions of a pro se litigant must be construed liberally and interpreted to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest,” Triestman v. Fed. … Moreover, a person may not be retained for more than 48 hours unless another physician, who is a member of the hospital’s psychiatric staff, confirms that the patient qualifies under the requirements of § 9.39(a).

Oliver v. American Express Company

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 11, 2023

Named Alabama Plaintiffs only have qualifying debit-card transactions. … “[A]n amendment clearly will not be allowed when the moving party has been guilty of delay in requesting leave to amend and, as a result of the delay, the proposed amendment, if permitted, would have the effect of prejudicing

Corrado v. New York Unified Court System

163 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 17, 2016

“A prima facie case of retaliation [under the FMLA] is established when a plaintiff demonstrates that: (1) she exercised rights protected under the FMLA; (2) she was qualified for her position; (3) she suffered an adverse … Accordingly, because Plaintiff’s negligent supervision claim clearly is preempted by the New York Workers’ Compensation Law, it is hereby dismissed with respect to all Individual Defendants.

Ulinski v. Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, Local 56

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 24, 2020

The CBA provides that, “Helpers must qualify as Assistant Signalmen within the first four years of employment as a Helper. … The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing beyond a preponderance of the evidence that subject-matter jurisdiction exists. Id.

S&L VITAMINS, INC. v. Australian Gold, Inc.

521 F. Supp. 2d 188 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2007

The moving party must establish that there are no genuine issues of material fact that AG has actually established such quality control procedures, follows them, and that S&L’s sales will diminish the value of the Marks. … As S&L readily admits, its use of AG’s copyrighted artwork is clearly commercial. S&L contends, however, that its use is transformative.

RVC Floor Decor, Ltd. v. Floor & Decor Holdings, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 7, 2023

“After qualifying to complete the survey, respondents were randomly assigned to see” one of two FLOOR DECOR logos. (Id. ¶ 2.2.) … In ruling on a motion in limine, evidence should be excluded, “[o]nly when [it] is ‘clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds.’” United States v.

Apuzza v. NYU Langone Long Island

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 11, 2023

her] employer; (3) [her or she] was otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation; (4) [he or she] suffered an adverse employment action; and (5) the adverse … Plaintiff alleges she was “regarded as” disabled because Defendant treated her like she had Covid-19 or a suppressed immune system prone to contracting and transmitting dangerous diseases. (DE 25-1 at ¶¶ 137-48.)

LAUDADIO v. Johanns

677 F. Supp. 2d 590 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 8, 2010

Washington admitted in his e-mail that the union contract did not necessarily support this restriction: “sick leave abuse is clearly defined. … The mixed-motive analysis, however, is only appropriate where plaintiff offers evidence of employer’s retaliatory animus by, for example, producing such "smoking gun” evidence as policy documents, statements, clearly establishing

United States v. E.L.

188 F. Supp. 3d 152 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 19, 2016

Of all sentences under § 2G2.2 in 2009, 94,8% involved an image of a prepubescent minor (qualifying for a two-level increase pursuant to §.2G2.2(b)(2)), 97.2% involved a computer (qualifying for a two-level increase pursuant … (qualifying for a five-level enhancement pursuant to § 2G2.2(b)(7)(D)).

In re Long Island R.

91 F. Supp. 439 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 11, 1950

The other trustees named had no connection whatever with the Pennsylvania Railroad, were Long Island residents, and, on the basis solely of my personal knowledge of their character and competence, I believed them fully qualified … At the end of that discussion Judge Goodrich says that as far as the' Pennsylvania directors are concerned “moral fraud is thus clearly eliminated”. At the trial of the Overfield case Mr.

Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. Davis-Edwards Pharmacal Corp.

341 F. Supp. 1303 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 18, 1972

Plaintiff argues that it is enough that the application presents the product, teaches the method of making it, and clearly states its utility — anticonvulsant uses. … Manson) a qualifying utility.

New York State Ass'n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey

492 F. Supp. 1099 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 2, 1980

Id., § 209(2) (McKinney Supp. 1979). 4 In order to qualify under the program, various financial and categorical eligibility requirements must be met, 5 and the foster parents must be certified by OMRDD as “family care providers … Only when the financial burden upon the state becomes prohibitive or clearly inequitable should this Court stay its hand. 20 Because defendants’ obligation in this case is derived not from provisions of state or federal law

Brookhaven Town Conservative Committee v. Walsh

258 F. Supp. 3d 277 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 15, 2017

Insofar as defendants did use such donations to remunerate Walsh with a monthly stipend and for his automobile-associated expenses (see SAC ¶¶ 47-49), those distributions could qualify as legitimate business expenditures. … It would thus be clearly inappropriate for the district court to retain jurisdiction over the state law claims when there is no basis for supplemental jurisdiction.”); Karmel v.

Choi v. 37 Parsons Realty LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 22, 2022

For that reason, he took on the task of determining whether the allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint were sufficient to establish liability. … Judge Levy held that plaintiffs “fail[ed] to establish both the enterprise and pattern elements of a RICO violation.”

Edwards v. County Of Nassau

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 29, 2022

“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 would … Department of Social Services, “established that a municipality . . . is a person within the meaning of Section 1983.” Bellamy, 914 F.3d at 756.

Lapierre v. Dzurenda

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 17, 2021

LaPierre’s In Forma Pauperis Application is Granted Upon review of Plaintiff’s declarations in support of his IFP application, the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified by his … dismiss an in forma pauperis action if 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

Bonilla v. Griffin

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 15, 2019

Exhaustion that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously As a threshold matter, a district court or incorrectly. … Of particular application of, clearly established federal relevance here, the bare reference to a lawyer law.

United States v. Mazzeo

306 F. Supp. 2d 294 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 23, 2004

Certainly, the payment of mortgage interest and life insurance premiums might well qualify as spousal support. … In practice, it may be rare that a creditor other than the United States can do this, because most creditors do not share the United States’ privilege of immunity from state law statutes of limitations.

In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation

611 F. Supp. 1296 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 18, 1985

Public policy clearly favors settlements at the earliest practicable stage of a dispute. … The exception to the general rule of immunity from the assessment clearly applies in the instant case.

Guerrero v. Loiacono

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

“Evidence should be excluded on a motion in limine only when the evidence is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds.” United States v. Paredes, 176 F. … Root is qualified to provide expert testimony, provided that it conforms to FRE 702’s remaining requirements.