Case law

National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. Ambassador Group, Inc.

830 F. Supp. 147 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 12, 1993

and no demand for repayment was ever made to the Board, no claim was made on the members of the Board within the meaning of the National Union policy); see also St. … Co. v.

Concerned Citizens for Creedmoor, Inc. v. Cuomo

570 F. Supp. 575 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 31, 1983

In Woe v. … See, e.g., Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v.

Canela v. Jetblue Airways Corporation

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 7, 2023

See Mateo v. JetBlue Airways Corp., 847 F. Supp. 2d 383, 387 (E.D.N.Y. 2012). … See id. at 166; see also King v. Am.

Carson v. Lewis

35 F. Supp. 2d 250 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 4, 1999

Golino, 950 F.2d at 870 ; see also Brown v. … Board of County Commissioners of Bryan County, Oklahoma v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 , 117 S.Ct. 1382, 1386 , 137 L.Ed.2d 626 (1997) (quoting Monell, 436 U.S. at 692 , 98 S.Ct. at 2027 ).

Purofied Down Products Corp. v. Puro Down International of New Jersey Corp.

530 F. Supp. 134 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 12, 1982

White v. Trowbridge, 216 Pa.St. 11, 18, 22 [ 64 A. 862 ]. … Waterman Co. v.

United States v. Castro-Tirado

407 F. Supp. 210 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 26, 1976

At the time, Castro was disembarking from Flight No. 16 originating in Los Angeles, California, with a stop at Phoenix, Arizona, where Castro had boarded. … See United States v.

Rosato v. Barnhart

352 F. Supp. 2d 386 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 22, 2005

. § 405 (g); Jasinski v. Barnhart, 341 F.3d 182, 184 (2d Cir.2003); Brown v. Apfel, 174 F.3d 59, 61-62 (2d Cir.1999). Substantial evidence is “more than a mere scintilla.” Richardson v. … Brown, 174 F.3d at 62-63 .

Lafontant v. Aristide

844 F. Supp. 128 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 27, 1994

May 13, 1983) (Swiss court is “organ” of state); Rios v. Marshall, 530 F.Supp. 351 (S.D.N.Y.1981) (foreign labor board is “instrumentality” under FSIA, thus entitling board officials to protection). … California State Board of Equalization, 858 F.2d 1376 , 1382 n. 5 (9th Cir.1988) in context of a suit against foreign sovereign); Filartiga v.

Schupbach v. Shinseki

905 F. Supp. 2d 422 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 23, 2012

Brown v. Henderson, 257 F.3d 246, 252 (2d Cir.2001) (emphasis in original). … Mead Coated Board, Inc., 836 F.Supp. 1552, 1571 (M.D.Ala.1993), aff'd 41 F.3d 668 (11th Cir.1994) (granting summary judgment in race discrimination case because defendant “promoted a number of black employees to positions

Cave v. East Meadow Union Free School District

480 F. Supp. 2d 610 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 19, 2007

Cave came to a school board meeting and asked why the School District was violating federal law. … Abrams v.

Ferlito v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 23, 2025

In Daubert v. … Brown GARY R. BROWN United States District Judge

Drummond v. IPC International, Inc.

400 F. Supp. 2d 521 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 18, 2005

Summary judgment is generally inappropriate where questions of the defendant’s state of mind are at issue, Gelb v. Board of Elections of the City of New York, 224 F.3d 149, 157 (2d. … (quoting Brown v. Henderson, 257 F.3d 246, 252 (2d Cir.2001)); see also Brennan v.

The Otsego

40 F.2d 925 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 19, 1930

S. v. Alex Dussel Iron Works (The Sacandaga) 31 F. (2d) 535, 1929 A. M. C. 573 (C. C. A), is too recent to admit of doubt as to the present state of the law. … Powers does not remember the name of his mate at that time; he made a statement to some Army Board, which he had recently consulted. That is the libelant’s case.

McSweeney v. Bayport Bluepoint Central School District

864 F. Supp. 2d 240 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 20, 2012

In Pembaur v. … In Davis v.

Meiselman v. Richardson

743 F. Supp. 143 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 20, 1990

v. … In Wilson v.

Ellis Goldsmith v. Smith

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 14, 2021

“In sum, Jackson [v. … Brown HON. GARY R. BROWN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United States v. Schlesinger

372 F. Supp. 2d 711 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 8, 2005

In the interview, Schlesinger told Fire Marshal Santangelo that he was the “Manager of financial operations” and held no official position in the company or on the board of directors. … See, e.g., Brown v. Keane, 355 F.3d 82, 89 (2d Cir. 2004). As such the statement is admissible under the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule. C.

L.M. v. East Meadow School District

11 F. Supp. 3d 306 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2014

Board of Educ. of Hyde Park, 459 F.3d 356, 363 (2d Cir.2006); see also Burlington, 471 U.S. at 370 , 105 S.Ct. 1996 and Florence County Sch. Dist. Four v. Carter ex rel. … C.L. v. Scarsdale, at 837 , quoting Board of Educ. of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist., Westchester County v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, 206, 208 , 102 S.Ct. 3034 , 73 L.Ed.2d 690 (1982).

Dixie Drinking Cup Co. v. Paper Utilities Co.

5 F.2d 322 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 26, 1925

Brown et al., 29 F. 341 , where the court said, referring to the above ease: “Notwithstanding this authority *324 it must be held that such practice cannot be sanctioned.” … Rodman Co. v. Houghton Co., supra. So in Hartford v. Cleveland Co. (D.

In Re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation

584 F. Supp. 2d 546 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 6, 2008

See Oetjen v. … New Zealand Diary Board, 954 F.Supp. 733 (S.D.N.Y. 1997), was charged with considering the effect of the New Zealand Dairy Board Act of 1961, a formally codified New Zea-land law.