Case law

Garone v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

436 F. Supp. 2d 448 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 27, 2006

They had to go with somebody, because they had' to be DOT qualified, and that was part of the problem also with who can go out and who couldn’t. … Similarly, though the applicability of the Faragher/EUerth affirmative defense has not yet been clearly established for employers under NYSHRL and NYCHRL, see Forrest v.

Trisvan v. Regal Entertainment Group

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 17, 2021

dismiss sua sponte an in forma pauperis action if the Court determines it “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … If Plaintiff intends to invoke the Court’s diversity jurisdiction over his state law claim, Plaintiff must clearly state the basis for doing so, including facts to support the amount in controversy.

Velez-Garriga v. Bell

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 23, 2024

A petitioner's failure to comply with a state procedural rule qualifies as such an adequate and independent state ground, provided that (i) the state court actually "relied on the procedural bar as an … established Federal law,” Harrington, 562 U.S. at 98.

Prabhakar v. Life Insurance Co. of North America

996 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 16, 2013

As a result of the severe post-concussion syndrome, she is also suffering from a[sic] severe anxiety and depression but this is clearly post-traumatic in origin. … New York, however, also permits parties to establish a shorter limitations period by written agreement. Id. (citing N.Y.

Hisler v. Royce

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 25, 2025

The Appellate Division's alternative finding that there was no Confrontation Clause violation was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law or an unreasonable determination of facts. … "A petitioner may establish constitutionally inadequate performance if he shows that counsel omitted significant and obvious issues while pursuing issues that were clearly and significantly weaker."

Ricciardo v. NYU Hospitals Center

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

In order to make out a prima facie case of FMLA retaliation, a plaintiff must establish that “(1) [s]he exercised rights protected under the FMLA; (2) [s]he was qualified for h[er] position; (3) [s]he suffered an adverse … See Haynes, 2024 WL 5508199, at *10, *20 (concluding the plaintiff’s email to her former employer titled “vacation leave” was sufficient to show she exercised her FMLA rights because she “clearly communicated her intention

Chow v. SentosaCare, LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 26, 2023

On the contrary, the statute and pattern jury instruction clearly explain that a plaintiff must prove both a deprivation and a 9 separate injury. … to seek any available form of relief on that claim. 14 antagonistic to the interests of other members of the class and (2) plaintiff’s attorneys are qualified

Cohen v. SN Servicing Corporation as servicer for U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Trustee of the SCIG Series III Trust

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

But citing to cases where a creditor lacked knowledge does not establish that it is a prerequisite for annulment relief. Cohen also argues that In re Soares sets forth that requirement. (Reply Br. at 2–3). … Soares only notes that innocent creditors may qualify for annulment—not the converse. 107 F.3d 969, 977 (1st Cir. 1997) (“When a creditor inadvertently violates the automatic stay in ignorance of a pending bankruptcy,

Brettler v. Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America

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

Clearly, the essential facts out of which the present action arises are not “identical in all respects” to those of Blau, Halberstam I, or Halberstam II. … Specifically, § 3211 “establishes two dates on which past-due insurance policies lapse.” Maharan v. Berkshire Life Ins. Co., 110 F. Supp. 2d 217, 221 (W.D.N.Y. 2000).

Naula v. New York City Department of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 30, 2025

Thus, the election of remedies doctrine clearly applies here, and this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider Naula’s state law claims. … Defendants do not dispute that Naula is a member of a protected class or was qualified.

Jurist v. The Long Island Power Authority

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 10, 2020

jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims because “[s]tate courts are much more familiar with state jurisprudence, especially on complex issues of state environmental law,” and because “[s]tate agencies will claim immunity … In addition to satisfying the causation requirement, a defendant “must raise a colorable federal defense,”8 though “[c]ourts have imposed few limitations on what qualifies as a colorable federal defense.” Id. at 138.

Moudis v. United States

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

United States, 83 F.4th 156, 162 (2d Cir. 2023) (explaining that the FTCA “waives the sovereign immunity of the United States for certain classes of torts claims”). … “[N]egligence qualifies as a proximate cause where it is a substantial cause of the events which produced the injury.” Id. at 162 (quoting Mazella v. Beals, 27 N.Y.3d 694, 706 (2016)).

Zap Cellular, Inc. v. Weintraub

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 19, 2022

As discussed, the Complaint clearly alleges that Plaintiff revoked A. … As discussed in detail, Plaintiff’s Complaint clearly alleges that A.

Dubin v. County of Nassau

277 F. Supp. 3d 366 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 27, 2017

In order to state a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege (1) the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the- Constitution and its laws, and (2) that the deprivation was “committed by … their prior behavior, but instead penalized present and future violations of that law. 468 U.S. at 847-51 , 104 S.Ct. 3348 ; see also id. at 850-51 & n.7, 104 S.Ct. 3348 (“Because it allows late registration, § 12(f) is clearly

In Re Holocaust Victim Assets Litigation

528 F. Supp. 2d 109 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 14, 2007

On that same day, Neuborne objected to the magistrate judge’s recommended hourly rate, arguing that “the record conclusively establishes [it] to be $700 per hour.” Neuborne’s Not. of Objection to R & R at 1. … Clearly, there is no plain error in any aspect of the R & R.

National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Acusport, Inc.

271 F. Supp. 2d 435 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 21, 2003

us regard guns in private hands as the scourge of our times, and favor government imposition of controls and punitive deterrence of all sorts, many others think of possession of firearms ... as the gift of the Founders, immune … Clearly, a legitimate state interest is furthered.... [Defendant] has faded to demonstrate that the burden here would be clearly excessive compared to the benefit.”).

Moncayo v. Superintendent Green Haven Correctional Facility

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 28, 2025

The writ may also be granted if a state court decision is an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law, meaning that “the state court identifies the correct governing legal principle from [Supreme Court … Apart from a state court’s adjudication of a claim that was an unreasonable application of, or contrary to, clearly established federal law, a district court may grant a writ of habeas corpus when the state court decision

Lurch

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 19, 2025

“[A] private entity can qualify as a state actor in a few limited circumstances.” Manhattan Cmty. Access Corp. v. Halleck (“Halleck”), 587 U.S. 802, 809 (2019). … Supp. 3d 465, 531 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (finding on summary judgment that JHMC, as a private hospital, does not qualify as a “person” under Section 1983); Murphy v.

Graziano v. First Choice Medical PLLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 13, 2019

That framework requires a plaintiff to first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, a plaintiff must show that: “(1) [s]he is a member of a protected class; (2) [s]he was qualified for the position [s]he held;

Lora v. Board of Ed. of City of New York

456 F. Supp. 1211 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 2, 1978

This is clearly insufficient. See transcript at 1086-90; 1101-08. … The Court *1286 takes judicial notice of the limited pool of qualified bilingual professionals.