Case law

Schwartz v. Allstate Insurance Company

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

In any event, even assuming that the circumstances here could still qualify as a termination, Plaintiff’s claims about his “termination” all fail. … clearly insufficient evidence for a jury to ultimately conclude that Plaintiff was terminated because he complained to Feustel.

Continental Orthopedic Appliances, Inc. v. Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York, Inc.

40 F. Supp. 2d 109 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 15, 1999

Arimed agreed to provide minimal substandard 0 & P services to HIP patients, and/or withhold services outright from such patients; (3) engage in an unlawful and illegal bid rigging scheme under which the defendants exclude qualified … Clearly, as it pertains to the matter before this Court, the obvious finding that Yale in and of itself is not a relevant product market, does not dictate a finding that HMOs can never be a separate viable product market.

In re Simon II Litigation

211 F.R.D. 86 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 19, 2002

Even if everything one says is true, if something is omitted which would qualify the assertion, then it may amount to a false representation. … Rather, our cases make plain that the misconstruction must contradict law of the other State that is clearly established and that has *173 been brought to the court’s attention ...

Phillips v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 28, 2022

Abueg’s functional analysis, which the ALJ found vague, the record merely establishes the fact of a limited range of motion in plaintiff’s right shoulder. … That was proper since plaintiff’s shoulder surgery in September 2017 clearly reset the table in determining his RFC. 19.

Dacosta v. City of N.Y.

296 F. Supp. 3d 569 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 8, 2017

immunity. … This was clearly an erroneous belief, known to be erroneous by defense counsel. It is immaterial why he believed this.

Hejmej v. Peconic Bay Medical Center

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

However, “this is clearly a rebranding of emotional-distress damages, which are precluded by Cummings,” Fantasia, 2022 U.S. Dist. … To establish a prima facie claim under Section 504 of the RA, Plaintiffs must establish that: (1) they are “handicapped person[s]” as defined by the RA; (2) they are “otherwise qualified to participate in the offered activity

Kane v. Advanced Care Staffing, LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 6, 2023

Additionally, Plaintiff clearly suffered an adverse action when she was terminated from Advanced Care Staffing. See Buon v. … A period of six weeks suffices to establish prima facie causal connection.

Corrow

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 26, 2026

Law § 3401 (establishing the NCHCC as a public benefit corporation). … when I did not, does not establish defendants prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.

Simon v. Cruz

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 19, 2020

A malicious prosecution plaintiff must “establish what occurred in the grand jury, and [] further establish that those circumstances warrant a finding of misconduct sufficient to erode the premise that the Grand Jury … There, the plaintiff was in custody for over two months despite the fact that police officers had sole possession of and deliberately lied about a video that clearly exonerated him. Id.

Toth v. New York City Department of Education

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

Merely alleging that other students missed instruction does not establish a policy or custom. … to seek to vindicate the private interest of the Plaintiff-student T.T;” “the FAC seeks an order directing the [defendant] to provide T.T. with a certain number of hours of compensatory educational services, which is clearly

Cardenas v. Edita's Bar & Restaurant, Inc.

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

Coverage Defendants qualify as employers for purposes of the NYLL. … The three paystubs for Cardenas that defendants present as evidence do not clearly state the amount of tip credit. See Decl. of Thomas Ricotta Ex. 1.

Golden

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 23, 2026

Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield, 152 F.3d 67, 75 (2d Cir. 1998) (“It is well established that a district court may rely on matters of public record in deciding a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), including case law and … Deciding if Verizon breached the CBA clearly requires interpreting the CBA, not merely referring to it. See Greco v. Commc’ns Workers of Am., Loc. 1104, 824 F.

Plasterer v. US Bank Trust National Association for VRMTG

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 14, 2025

Each time, US Bank determined that Plasterer did not qualify for any of its loss mitigation options. (Id.) … None of the bankruptcy court’s factual findings were clearly erroneous. Williams, 254 F.3d at 46.

Dunaway v. Kopp

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 1, 2025

“A state court decision is an ‘unreasonable application’ of clearly established federal law if the state court identifies the correct controlling legal principle announced by the Supreme Court but unreasonably … “The focus . . . is on whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law is objectively unreasonable[;] . . . an unreasonable application is different from an incorrect one.” Bell v.

Neary v. Driscoll

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 19, 2024

In Forma Pauperis Upon review of Neary’s IFP application (IFP App., ECF No. 2), the Court finds that he is qualified by his financial status to commence this action without … It is well-established that the TPBR does not provide for a cause of action. See United States v. Schwartz, 615 F.

Panarello v. Northwell Health

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

both of these reasons, the Court clearly set forth the requirements of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332 as well as Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and granted Panarello leave to file an amended complaint in accordance … district court must dismiss an IFP complaint or amended complaint if the action is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune

United States v. Gambino

835 F. Supp. 74 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 26, 1993

Such a finding *87 is permissible only if supported by evidence establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. … The notes clearly do not reflect the kind of factual narrative contemplated by the Jencks Act and fall far short of the Palermo standard. See also Hanks v.

Burris v. Whitney Capital Management

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

Having not received Plaintiff’s objections before the deadline, the Court entered an order adopting the R&R, on April 15, 2021, after finding that it was not “clearly erroneous.” (See 4/15/2021 Docket Order.) … “To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege: (1) the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, (2) by a person acting under the color of state law.” Id.

Edilson

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 7, 2026

As Justice Scalia noted, “[t]his one-sided-coverage argument clearly did not go to the validity of the delegation provision.” Id. at 73. … Nor have Plaintiffs explained why an arbitrator should be any less qualified to make that determination than the Court.

Stutchin v. Town of Huntington

71 F. Supp. 2d 76 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 28, 1999

Also, it was established that Stutchin is a member of the Mill Pond Association, and that the Association dock is approximately 50 to 70 feet from the plaintiffs’ property. … Such a right is qualified, however, and “must yield to the State’s legitimate exercise of police power.” Matter of Maher’s Sodus Point Bait Shop, Inc. v.