Case law

Livingston v. Cablevision Systems Corp.

966 F. Supp. 2d 208 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 5, 2013

Second, Plaintiffs misconstrue the nature and intent of Rutledge’s comments, which were clearly statements of opinion or mere puffery. … fourth *220 quarter of 2010, as detailed in the company’s extensive SEC reports, it is clear that “no reasonable investor would rely on [Rutledge’s statements about the re-trans dispute] given [his] cautious language and qualifying

Porter v. Port Authority Of New York And New Jersey

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2022

Porter to be at least minimally qualified for these positions, he did not believe Mr. Porter to be one of the more highly qualified applicants. Huntley A. Lawrence Dep. Pl.’s Ex. … To establish a prima facie case in the context of such a claim, Mr.

In Re Crazy Eddie Securities Litigation

812 F. Supp. 338 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 20, 1993

Peat Marwick cites no authority for the proposition that Congress intended to immunize such culpable conduct for such purely formal reasons. … The Enstar Group, Inc., 755 F.Supp. 1247, 1258 (D.Del.1991) ("If any member of the public who might choose to invest in the [corporations's] common stock were to qualify as part of the protected class, then the `limited group

Fishman ex rel. Fishman v. Daines

164 F. Supp. 3d 409 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 4, 2016

At that time, § 358-5.5 required defaulting Medicaid appellants to request that their hearing be rescheduled within 15 days of default, and to show good cause, or to establish within 45 days that they had not received the … “An agency interpretation that does not qualify for Chevron deference is still entitled to ‘respect according to its persuasiveness,’ as evidenced by ‘the thoroughness evident in [the agency’s] consideration, the validity

Gutama

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 3, 2026

Clearly, if defendants missed the original May 2023 response deadline, conversations with plaintiff’s counsel, see infra, had proven that he is flexible on timelines. See Dkt. Nos. 13-14. … Not to suggest that the result would be different under the more demanding standard of de novo review, the Court finds that under Nambiar, the fourth objection does not qualify as a valid written objection to Judge Kuo

Talford v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 26, 2024

To qualify for disability insurance benefits, the claimant must demonstrate that she was disabled as of the date she was last insured. Kohler v. … (Id.) 3 “SLE causes a person’s immune system to attack and injure the body’s own organs and tissues. Its cause is unknown, and diagnosis can be difficult.

Mutual Benefit Life Insurance v. Lindenman

911 F. Supp. 619 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 28, 1995

For the court to determine materiality as a matter of law, unequivocal evidence is required of the insurer’s practice concerning similar risks, or the insurer’s manuals, or “testimony of qualified employees of the insurer … It is irrelevant that Lubchansky, the insurance broker, may have told Lindenman that the Penn Mutual policy need not be included on the application, because Lindenman signed the application which clearly stated both that

Rappaport v. Under Armour, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 11, 2025

In Defendant’s view, Plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed because she fails to establish, and cannot establish, a cognizable injury under GBL §§ 349 or 350. … Thus, while the analysis may be able to establish an unsurprising correlation between these prices – that as reference prices are increased, so too are sale prices – it clearly cannot establish

Speaks v. Saeed

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 23, 2022

To maintain a Section 1983 claim, the plaintiff must establish that the conduct complained of: (1) was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities … immunity grounds.

B.Z. v. Hewlett-Woodmere Union Free School District

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 27, 2025

“To ensure that qualifying children receive a FAPE, a school district must create an individualized education program (‘IEP’) for each such child.” R.E. v. N.Y.C. … In fact, the IHO clearly stated “I find that [J.Z.] did not qualify for ESY.” IHO Decision at 22.

United States v. Dicristina

886 F. Supp. 2d 164 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 21, 2012

David DeRosa, who is also a well-qualified econometrician, testified at a post-verdict Daubert hearing on August 10, 2012. See generally Gov’t Expert Daubert Hr’g Tr. Dr. … Heeb concluded that “[tjhis clearly demonstrates that it is the relative skills of these [poker] players and not chance that is leading to their winning and losing....

Friedman v. Wahrsager

848 F. Supp. 2d 278 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 30, 2012

Nowhere in the pleading is the connection between USMP and the other defendants ever established. … Establishment of Vaduz, Liechtenstein v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc., 672 F.2d 1095, 1105 (2d Cir.1982) (internal citations, alterations, and quotation marks omitted).

Islam v. Melisa

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

Melisa: Islam studied under two professors who could qualify as “Dr. Melisa” in the 2013-14 academic year: Dr. Melisa Jn. Pierre and Dr. Melissa Adeyeye. … Oct. 24, 2000) (dismissing sua sponte fee-paying pro se plaintiff’s claims that were clearly time-barred); Livingston v.

Andrade

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 19, 2026

The Court has significant discretion to consider a number of factors in deciding whether to grant a default judgment, including: (1) whether the grounds for default judgment are clearly established; (2) whether the claims … Thus, based on the allegations in the Complaint, plaintiff qualifies as an “employee” and defendants qualify as “employers” under the FLSA.

Poppito v. North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 9, 2019

To this end, a plaintiff must prove: (1) he was a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) the adverse employment action took place under … These undisputed facts clearly                                                         1 Plaintiff’s counterstatement of material facts, containing complaints of misconduct by other staff members and

Doe v. Xi Fang Temple

District Court, E.D. New York · May 21, 2025

March 27, 2009) (“Giving information to the police that is known to be false qualifies as the commencement of a prosecution.”); Michaels v. … Doe asserts that three “case-specific circumstances” establish that Mr.

Hamilton v. Accu-Tek

935 F. Supp. 1307 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 12, 1996

The court reasoned that “defendants’ concerted aetion sought only permissible ends and acted only through permissible means” and that the activity was “clearly permissible” under the First Amendment right to petition. … The holder of such a license is not by reason of the rights and privileges granted by that license immune from punishment for operating a firearm or ammunition business or activity in violation of the provisions of any State

Rucci v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 11, 2025

ECF No. 8 at 7.8 Here, too, he does not clearly articulate how he thinks the ALJ erred—i.e., how she should have further restricted the RFC to account for these impairments. … The qualified assessment was supported by substantial evidence. See Pellam, 508 F.

Rucano v. LaManna

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 4, 2021

For the purposes of federal habeas review, “clearly established law” is defined as “the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of [the Supreme] Court’s decisions as of the time of the relevant … A state court decision is “contrary to,” or an “unreasonable application of,” clearly established law if the decision: (1) is contrary to Supreme Court precedent on a question of law

Jones v. Sea Tow Services Freeport New York, Inc.

828 F. Supp. 1002 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 21, 1993

The Fifth Circuit affirmed, determining that the lower court’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous. Id. at 470 . … Clearly, these designations indicate that the parties contemplated enforcement of this award in Great Britain. Cf. Wilson v.