Case law

Guevera

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

In the alternative, Guevera requests an immediate hearing requiring Freeport to establish its right to continue to possess the vehicle. … Accordingly, Plaintiffs do not qualify for the limited exception to the general rule that delay destroys a presumption of irreparable harm.”).

American Integrated Security Group Inc. v. Terra Sound Technology LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 28, 2023

While AISG clearly lost business in Hawaii, it also alleges facts 8 See ECF No. 29-3 ¶ 6 (“To say, as Ferus does, that Clearway is not a New York customer because its main office is in San Francisco, CA, is like saying … “Common sense dictates that a company using information gathered in New York to wage war on another company’s New York business prospects would not be immune to being haled into a New York forum merely because it launched

McDonald v. Esposito

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 18, 2021

“It is well established that the submissions of a pro se litigant must be construed liberally and interpreted to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest.” Meadows v. … These disputes are not clearly before the state court, and even if they were, it is not clear that the state court could grant relief on these claims. See Simmons v.

Gioia v. SouthEnd Psychiatry

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

The Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction over Gioia VI, Gioia VII, and Gioia IX As an initial matter, the Court has reviewed Gioia’s IFP application in Gioia IX and finds that Gioia has established that she is qualified … Co., 126 F.3d 100, 103 (2d Cir. 1997) (“[I]t is well-established that allegations of residency alone cannot establish citizenship . . . .”).

Hameedi, M.D. v. Becerra

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

. § 1320a-7(f), which incorporates by reference the limited waiver of sovereign immunity in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 42 U.S.C. § 1320a- 7(f)(1). … “The substantial evidence standard is a very deferential standard of review—even more so than the clearly erroneous standard.” Schillo v. Kijakazi, 31 F.4th 64, 74 (2d Cir. 2022).

Li v. The Chinese Nail Salon Association of East America Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 28, 2024

Apr. 3, 2023) (“the filing of [an FLSA] lawsuit clearly constitutes a protected activity”). … prohibition on retaliation applies regardless of whether an employer qualifies as an enterprise engaged in commerce.” Acosta v.

Gioia v. Johnson & Johnson

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

The Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction over Gioia VI, Gioia VII, and Gioia IX As an initial matter, the Court has reviewed Gioia’s IFP application in Gioia IX and finds that Gioia has established that she is qualified … Co., 126 F.3d 100, 103 (2d Cir. 1997) (“[I]t is well-established that allegations of residency alone cannot establish citizenship . . . .”).

Khozouri-Zadeh v. County of Nassau

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

Section 1983 “Section 1983 provides a civil claim for damages against any person who, acting under color of state law, deprives another of a right, privilege or immunity … claim, but it is clearly established that a pretrial detainee’s deliberate indifference claims are evaluated under the Fourteenth Amendment.

United States v. Hatfield

795 F. Supp. 2d 219 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 14, 2011

To the extent that these reclassifications inflated DHB’s share price, they are clearly subject to forfeiture. … And here, the Government has provided an expert opinion from a well-qualified economist, concerning what an appropriate reduction would be. ■ And Defendants did not refute this assessment.

Ostrowski v. The Port Authority of NY & NJ

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 3, 2023

Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s action is clearly untimely because he did not file his formal Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC until more than 180 days after his most recent suspension. … First, a plaintiff must “establish a prima facie case” of discrimination by demonstrating “(1) that she was within the protected . . . group, (2) that she was qualified for the position, (3) that she experienced adverse

Babino v. Gesualdi

278 F. Supp. 3d 562 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 4, 2017

. : Only those employees who perform covered work qualify for benefits. … As the Plaintiff brought ERISÁ claims against the Vacation Fund under § 502 of ERISA, he clearly meets both of the Davi-la and Montefiore prongs.

United States v. Schlesinger

438 F. Supp. 2d 76 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 17, 2006

David Stein-berg, a self-employed sewing machine repairman, testified under a grant of immunity that in January 1999 he assessed the damage to the machines at the factory. … This argument is clearly without merit. Impeachment evidence that bears only on credibility is generally not a sufficient basis for obtaining a new trial.

Davis v. The City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 9, 2021

Plaintiff cites no case law for his assertion that filing an IAB complaint qualifies as pursuing a state law remedy. … Dec. 7, 2015) (“[Defendant] may not be 15 Plaintiff argues that he is entitled to proceed on a failure to intervene claim against all three individual defendants—Sommer, LaFortune, and DiLapi—though the complaint clearly

Allstate Insurance Company v. D'Arienzo

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

Next, Allstate argues that New York law applies to the instant action, which places the burden on the putative insured to establish coverage in coverage dispute issues. (Mem. at 16– 18.) … Additionally, Allstate argues that third-party liability coverage is clearly defined in the Auto Policy and PUP, and limited to the policyholders, their spouses, and any resident relative, none of which applies to Taylor

In re: NIO, Inc., Securities Litigation

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 3, 2020

[and] boilerplate plans for cooperation” did not establish that proposed group would work effectively and cohesively as lead plaintiff) (citing Pipefitters Local No. 636 Defined Benefit Plan v. Bank of Am. … Likewise, given his significant losses, Mundy “clearly has a sufficient interest in the outcome of the case to ensure vigorous [advocacy].” Kniffin, 379 F. Supp. 3d at 265 (quoting City of Monroe Emps.’ Ret. Sys. v.

United States v. Laurent

861 F. Supp. 2d 71 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 2, 2011

Rev.Code § 9.41.040(2)(a)(iv) (“A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under subsection (1) of this section … Several courts have held that those provisions violate due process on their face because they “establish that an arrest on the stated charges, without more, irrebuttably establishes that such conditions are required, thereby

Murray v. Cunningham

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 20, 2023

"[W]hen a petitioner fails to raise his federal claims in compliance with relevant state procedural rules, the state court's refusal to adjudicate the claim ordinarily qualifies as an independent and adequate state ground … Furthermore, the Appellate Division "clearly and expressly" stated that Carlton's ineffective assistance claim fails because the matter was not brought in a CPL § 440.10 proceeding; thus, federal habeas review on the

Fernandez v. Wenig Saltiel LLP

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

Teal, 457 U.S. 440, 454–55 (1982) (“Under Title VII, a racially balanced work force cannot immunize an employer from liability for specific acts of discrimination. . . . … Disparate Treatment The defendants agree that the plaintiff “is a member of a protected class, was qualified for the position, and that her termination constitutes an adverse

Sharp International Corp. v. State Street Bank & Trust Co. (In Re Sharp International Corp.)

302 B.R. 760 · District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 5, 2003

Further, Sharp was clearly damaged by the Spitzes’ large-scale looting of the company — indeed, the Bankruptcy Court has entered a judgment against the Spitzes (and several of their companies) jointly and severally in the … Although the case law and the Restatement identify “inducement” as an independent form of participation, there is scant authority setting forth exactly what conduct would qualify as inducement in this context.

NYcityVAN, LLC v. Thomas

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

establish trademark rights” and citing TTAB opinions on unlawful use with approval). … These per se violations of federal law clearly establish the first element of the Unlawful Use Defense, leaving only the issue of materiality for the Court to decide.