Case law

James v. D'Amore

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 1, 2024

established Federal law. … “Although not expressly stated in the Sixth Amendment, a clearly established corollary to the right to counsel is the right to dispense with a lawyer's help, and to represent oneself.” Id.

Coads v. Nassau County

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 31, 2024

According to Defendants, Plaintiffs are attempting to establish a violation of MHRL § 34(4)(b) by establishing an underlying violation of Section 2 of the FVRA, which raises issues of federal law. … Plaintiffs’ opposition brief clearly set out this “federal theory” for their MHRL claim vote dilution claim.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Razmilovic

822 F. Supp. 2d 234 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2011

Thus, the salaries of the defendants in those cases were clearly connected to the defendants’ wrongdoing and, therefore, constituted ill-gotten gains. … inflated during the fraud period and the amount Razmilovic is liable to disgorge, are entitled to little or no weight because, inter alia, in addition to her omission of two (2) statistically relevant dates,: (a) she is not qualified

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. AZ Metro Distributors LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 16, 2020

Plaintiff counters that the evidence clearly establishes a prima facie case. … “To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination under the ADEA . . . a plaintiff must demonstrate the following: (1) [claimant] was within the protected class; (2) [claimant] was qualified for the position; (3) [

Comba v. United States

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 23, 2021

Div., 2d Dep’t 1998) (“[I]t is well established that a rear-end collision with a stopped vehicle establishes a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the operator of the following vehicle”). … Therefore, Plaintiff has established a prima facie case for liability.

T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Town of Islip

893 F. Supp. 2d 338 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 21, 2012

Although a reviewing court would not normally “look far beyond [a local board’s] citing of aesthetics to find a valid basis for a local zoning decision, ... under the TCA, a reviewing court can find that aesthetics qualify … In addition, at the Decision Hearing, the chairman of the Board concurred, stating “It is my position, anyway, in this particular situation, there is clearly a lack of coverage here.

Sass v. MTA Bus Co.

6 F. Supp. 3d 238 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 4, 2014

Clearly, a central concern of the Human Rights Law is to make such victims “whole.” This Court has repeatedly acknowledged that as the purpose of an interest award. … Department of Labor's *258 benefit reimbursement explanation submitted by Plaintiff, the traditional contribution method is analogous to an insurance scheme, in which an employer pays a fixed percentage of its employees’ qualifying

Morrow

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 22, 2026

In order to establish a claim that the denial of food constitutes a constitutional deprivation, however, a prisoner must establish that a “sufficiently serious condition” resulted from not receiving food. Evans v. … courts do not examine “applicable religious tenets,” the requirement to plausibly allege that the conduct at issue infringed on an individual’s sincerely held religious beliefs is meant to “dispose of claims that are so clearly

Leviton Manufacturing Co. v. Reeve

942 F. Supp. 2d 244 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 7, 2013

Therefore, the Court must assess whether Garel’s delivery of an opinion letter for a stock purchase agreement that occurred in New York State with a purchaser that has its principal place of business in New York State, qualifies … In addition, as set forth above, the language of the clause in the Stock Purchase Agreement is clearly mandatory, not permissive.

Graves v. Smith

811 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 15, 2011

A Rule 60(b) motion may qualify as a successive habeas petition where it “attacks the federal court’s previous resolution of a claim on the merits.” Gonzalez v. … The evidence before this court in 2003 did not conclusively establish that the prosecution in petitioner’s case did not have any exculpatory evidence.

Canon U.S.A., Inc. v. Cavin's Business Solutions, Inc.

208 F. Supp. 3d 494 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 23, 2016

Canon claims that the retail dealers then qualified for “unearned and undeserved CSMP Program credits ... for particular units, and thereby avoid[ed] payment of the full purchase price due and owing to Canon ... for such … District courts “have not dismissed actions as untimely on Rule 12(b)(6) motions unless the ‘complaint shows clearly that a claim is not timely.’ ” Id. at 401-02 (quoting Robert Smalls Inc. v.

Weiss v. Sequium Asset Solutions, LLC

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

The Avila court qualified its directive, however, by stating that no liability would obtain when a collection notice “clearly states that the holder of the debt will accept payment of … But Cortez did not establish a bright line rule that every settlement offer must come with an expiration date.

Haji v. Miller

584 F. Supp. 2d 498 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 24, 2008

Detective Ward, whom the court qualified as an expert based on his fourteen years experience as a narcotics investigator, testified that in his opinion the sheets were narcotics records. T. 999. … But what does the wedging of that moment in time establish?

Archer v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. New York · May 25, 2021

Rather, the non-moving party must make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of each element constituting its case. See Celotex Corp. v. … Plaintiff clearly stated she has not and does not intend to abandon her WOP claim. Pl. Reply at 3.

Terrell v. Kickbush

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 16, 2019

“‘Clearly established Cir. 2009) (quoting Spears v. Greiner, 459 Federal law’ means ‘the holdings, as opposed F.3d 200, 203 (2d Cir. 2006)). … Lewis, 188 F.3d application” of clearly established federal 71, 77 (2d Cir. 1999) (citation omitted).

Allen v. Royce

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 13, 2022

Petitioner has failed to show that the state appellate decision rejecting these claims was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of … That determination did not reflect either an unreasonable determination of the facts or an unreasonable application of any clearly established Supreme Court precedent. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).

Chizor v. Lilley

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 30, 2024

To allow that type of evidence in now would clearly go to propensity . . . . … This Court will not disturb the Appellate Division's determination unless Chizor can show that it "involved an unreasonable application of[] clearly established Federal law." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1).

McAllister

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 16, 2026

The arresting officer “need only possess enough information to convince a reasonable person that the arrestee committed an offense, . . . and if he does, then he is immune from a subsequent claim of false arrest.” … However, the docket sheet in this action clearly reflects that, during a conference held before this Court on August 27, 2019, Plaintiff signed an authorization for his medical records, which was provided to Defendants’

Mendez v. MCSS Rest. Corp.

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2021

DISCUSSION There is no genuine dispute of material fact that MCSS and Miko are covered under the FLSA; that Siklas qualifies as an employer at Parkview, and that Siderakis qualifies … Although Siderakis testified that Cross Bay employees received their timecards when they were paid in cash, none of the timecards in the record clearly state the name of the employer as required by the NYLL.

The Travelers Indemnity Company v. Harleysville Insurance Company of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 14, 2023

It first establishes through E-J’s records that E-J did its own excavation work at the site (“more extensive and more involved,” according to Harleysville) both before and after Citywide’s September invoice. … Although Harleysville makes a desultory effort to claim that it was E-J, not Citywide, that created the hazard at the intersection in question, that is clearly a factual issue that does not need to await the determination