Case law

West v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 15, 2024

Further, the denial notice of his February 2015 application clearly laid out the consequences of failing to pursue an appeal, stating: “If you disagree with this decision and you file … a new application instead of appealing, you might lose some benefits, or not qualify for any benefits.

Maria v. McElroy

68 F. Supp. 2d 206 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 7, 1999

Where retroactivity is at issue, the rule of lenity, like the Landgraf rule, guarantees that a new immigration law will be applied to past conduct only when Congress clearly wished that result. … general principles of law recognized by civilized nations, and judicial decisions and teachings of qualified publicists).

Simon v. Philip Morris, Inc.

86 F. Supp. 2d 95 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 3, 2000

The Statement and the Guidance Notes clearly reaffirm where the B.A.T. Group stands -on key issues .... You will see that the. … Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 251 , 78 S.Ct. 1228 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1283 (1958) (“[Due process] restrictions are more than a guarantee of immunity from inconvenient or distant litigation.

Jackson v. Pilgrim Psychiatric Center

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

That is, “dismissal of a pro se complaint is nevertheless appropriate where a plaintiff has clearly failed to meet minimum pleading requirements.” Temple v. Hudson View Owners Corp., 222 F. … Against that backdrop, Plaintiff reportedly believes that “God created our bodies with an innate ability to heal and fight disease” and that she cannot allow the COVID-19 vaccine to “interfere with my immune system[,] .

Rivera v. The City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2023

With respect to the latter, “[a] dispute qualifies for [the capable-of-repetition] exception only if (1) the challenged action is in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and … Throughout the Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs clearly distinguish between the “NYC Mandate,” i.e., EEO 317, and the Order. (Am.

Gonzalez v. United States

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 22, 2025

The record clearly demonstrates Plaintiff easily meets the definition of “party,” which is not contested by Defendant. … Accordingly, Plaintiff has exhausted all administrative remedies required to qualify for an award of attorney fees. Compare Castillo v.

Shetty v. SG Blocks, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 15, 2020

“A court may take judicial notice of a document filed in another court not for the truth of the matters asserted in the other litigation, but rather to establish the fact of such litigation and related filings.” … I will state clearly here that Shetty has no obligation to respond at this time to the factual assertions made in defendants’ motion.

HOME INS. CO. OF IL (NH) v. Spectrum Info. Tech.

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

The insurer has the burden of establishing both that there has been a misrepresentation and that the misrepresentation was material. Id. at 131 . A. … 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

Jelinek v. Costello

247 F. Supp. 2d 212 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 27, 2003

The Appellate Division’s denial of the ineffective assistance claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law, nor was it an unreasonable determination of the facts. … The Appellate Division’s denial of the claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law, and it was not an unreasonable determination of the facts.

Celestin v. Martelly

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 10, 2021

“To qualify as official, an act must be imbued with some level of formality, such as the authorization by the foreign sovereign through an official statute, decree, order or resolution.” 4 The act of state doctrine is … Second, Plaintiff advances a theory that the imposition of the Fees was an act committed in the course of purely commercial operations, and thus is immune from the act of state doctrine. (Pl.’s Opp. 11.)

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

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

(C) Defendant moves to exclude evidence of (C) The subject document is clearly an out of any claim regarding the draft charge of court statement and subject to exclusion under discrimination of Archibald Roberts as … (F) AZ Metro moves to exclude “any (F) To the extent that this even qualifies as a reference, statement, or argument related motion in limine, without a specific showing undisclosed mitigations of damages”.

Moss v. Brentwood Union Free School District

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2023

Accordingly, as Plaintiff failed to carry his burden to establish that he provided adequate service on the Moving Defendants, see Khan, 360 F. … Clearly, this is insufficient to survive a summary judgment claim based on discriminatory intent.” (citing Johnson v.

Greene v. Clean Rite Centers, LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 29, 2024

[t]o fail to clearly and conspicuously disclose to a buyer, prior to the consummation of a transaction, the exact nature and extent of the seller’s refund, return, or cancellation policy[.]”). … fails to comport with New York’s General Business Law § 396-i(c)(3), in that Defendants do not clearly and conspicuously disclose [their] deceptive and unfair policies . . . .” (Id. ¶ 74.)

City of New York v. GeoData Plus, LLC

537 F. Supp. 2d 443 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 28, 2007

Originality Requirement “To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author.” Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340, 345 , 111 S.Ct. 1282 , 113 L.Ed.2d 358 (1991). … The Feist court stated in no uncertain terms that “novelty is not required” to establish originality. 499 U.S. at 346 , 111 S.Ct. 1282 .

Blouin v. Bay Point Capital Partners II, L.P.

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 4, 2025

A district court reviews a bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law de novo and its findings of fact under a clearly erroneous standard. … Thus, the absence of representation does not qualify as excusable neglect. Straehle v. INA Life Ins. Co., No. 01-CV-7180 (FLB), 2005 WL 3388612, at *3 (E.D.N.Y.

Orrego

District Court, E.D. New York · May 8, 2026

That diary, both parties agree, does not mention 10 In her responsive 56.1 Statement, Orrego qualifies her admission of this statement with the additional fact that she once mentioned Zantua’s harassment to Ms. … But that mischaracterizes the report, which clearly states that conditions improved after Uzcategui made her complaint to Mr. Knipfing. (Investigative Memo at 3).

Nelipa v. TD Bank, N.A.

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 17, 2024

This evidence is sufficient to establish typicality. … No. 50 ¶¶ 2-19), “it is clearly desirable to concentrate the litigation of their claims into a single action.” Hill, 2019 WL 1900503, at *10.

Vargas v. Saul

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 15, 2022

It is well-established in this Circuit that an ALJ presiding over a social security hearing must “affirmatively develop the record in light of the essentially non-adversarial nature of a benefits proceeding.” … As discussed above, the GAF score provided by LCSW Bozeman did not qualify as a medical opinion because, under the regulation applicable at the time, an LCSW did not qualify as an “acceptable medical source.”

Castello v. Bell

District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 13, 2023

“Clearly established federal law is limited to the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court at the time of the relevant state court decision.” Aponte v. La Manna, No. 19-CV-596, 2020 WL 4571820, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. … That was not “an unreasonable application of[] clearly established Federal law.” Cullen, 563 U.S. at 181.

City of New York v. United States Department of Commerce

822 F. Supp. 906 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 13, 1993

The ability to articulate clearly the basis and implications of the decision whether or not to adjust shall be a factor in the decision. The general rationale for the decision will be clearly stated. … Guideline One Guideline One, establishes the point of departure for analysis of the adjustment question.