Case law

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

Sunny v. Biden, Jr.

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 15, 2021

Oct. 12, 2021) (upholding New York City’s proof of vaccination requirement for entry into public establishments); Columbus Ale House, Inc. v. Cuomo, 495 F. … As to the fourth factor, an injunction eliminating the procedures established by the Guidance Cables would constitute a minimal intrusion on the agency’s activities.

Hallmark Licensing, LLC v. Dickens Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 21, 2020

In particular, dilution by blurring . . . refers to the gradual diminishment of a famous mark’s acquired “ability . . . to clearly and unmistakably distinguish one source through unauthorized … Tr. 94:1-13)) to establish a qualifying first sale and its implication that the 13 Magistrate Judge did not give “buy/sell” documents proper consideration

Dixon v. Superintendent of Eastern Correctional Facility

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 9, 2024

A petitioner's failure to comply with a state procedural rule qualifies as such an adequate and independent state ground, provided that (1) the state court actually "relied on the procedural bar as an independent basis … Reed, 489 U.S. 255, 261-62 (1989) (citation omitted), and (2) the state procedural rule is "firmly established and regularly followed," James v.

Home Insurance Co. of Illinois v. Spectrum Information Technologies, Inc.

930 F. Supp. 825 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 15, 1996

Corp., 979 F.2d at 279 , based on, inter alia: [E]vidence of the insurer’s practice with respect to similar risks, as shown by such documents as the insurer’s underwriting manuals or rules, and by testimony of a qualified … Court concludes that Home and Aetna have not established the applicability of these exclusions to the alleged facts. 2.

MGN Pension Trustees v. Morgan Stanley Trust Co.

947 F. Supp. 611 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 27, 1996

BACKGROUND Plaintiffs are the trustees of five pension funds which were established to provide pensions for approximately 17,000 retired employees and their families of companies owned or operated by Maxwell (hereinafter … Rule 19 aside, “the problems posed by the inability to implead potential third-party defendants clearly support[ ] holding the trial” in England.

Sullivan v. Aircraft Services Group, Inc.

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

Supp. 3d 280, 305 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) (“[A] defamatory statement of fact cannot be immunized by pairing it with ‘I believe.’” (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Thomas H. v. … by the subjective belief of the speaker immunizes that speaker from liability.”

B & R Supermarket, Inc. v. Visa, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 20, 2024

Officer’s opinions because (1) “he is not qualified as an expert economist,” to conduct his AFD Benchmark analysis, and (2) “he did not apply well-established economic principles” to his analysis of the AFD Benchmark. … Officer’s history of scholarship and experience as an expert witness in a complex antitrust case applying in-depth economic theory and insight establishes more than is required under Rule 702 to qualify as an expert to

Mendez v. U.S. Nonwovens Corp.

2 F. Supp. 3d 442 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 5, 2014

and payment of overtime”; (8) “[flailing to establish and/or implement procedures to assure payment of overtime earned on the regular pay day for the period in which such workweek ends”; and (9) “[flailing to establish and … The Plaintiffs’ Revised Amended Complaint clearly states that no such notice was given to the named Plaintiffs.

Navon v. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 11, 2019

Plaintiff also argues that Schachter’s November 19 letter failed to clearly and effectively state the amount of the debt owed. (See id.) … Rather, the allegations in the complaint establish that Schachter simply conveyed information about the amount due on the debt and the manner in which that amount was calculated.

Zoll v. Northwell Health, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 5, 2019

See id. at 436 (“Extending an employment relationship by one year by itself may not qualify as an adverse employment action. … However, even if Palms did not discuss Plaintiff’s probationary assessment period with Nichols prior to its expiration, it is not clear that this is enough to establish pretext.

Jackson v. Perez

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 4, 2020

Petitioner cannot establish even a momentary violation, as he cites no “clearly established” Supreme Court precedent forbidding a trial court from so briefly postponing consideration … Second Circuit case law — which can guide the Court in determining what constitutes “an unreasonable application” of “clearly established law,” see Wilson v.

Carter v. Maxwell

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

The Court explained, “[a]n allegation of a recent brutal beating, combined with three separate threatening incidents, some of which involved officers who purportedly participated in that beating, is clearly the sort of … However, as just established, while certain incidents, like the alleged assault and alleged poisoning had ceased, Plaintiff complains that there were several outstanding threats against him.

Carter v. Shepard

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

The Court explained, “[a]n allegation of a recent brutal beating, combined with three separate threatening incidents, some of which involved officers who purportedly participated in that beating, is clearly the sort of … However, as just established, while certain incidents, like the alleged assault and alleged poisoning had ceased, Plaintiff complains that there were several outstanding threats against him.

Holder v. LaManna

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 18, 2020

“Clearly established federal law refers to the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of the Supreme Court’s decisions as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Howard v. … that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly.

Cobble Hill Ass'n v. Adams

470 F. Supp. 1077 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 9, 1979

Where the governmental action under scrutiny is clearly not subject to NEPA obligations, it does not become so merely by its proximity in time and space to action which might be major. … Rather, it deals with such effects as “may cause any change, beneficial or adverse, in the quality of the historical, architectural, archeological, or *1091 cultural character that qualifies the property under the National

Lawrence Aviation Industries, Inc. v. Reich

28 F. Supp. 2d 728 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 7, 1998

Rowane didn’t know whether Lawrence Cohen reviewed the applicants in terms of whether they were qualified under the criteria. (Tr. 1115). Mr. … established.

Vega v. City of New York

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

However, if she was acting in her capacity as a un- ion official, her actions might not qualify as state actions. … However, that inference alone does not establish that Defendants themselves were the inform- ants.