Case law

Greene

District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 22, 2026

Defendants failed to meet their burden to show that they were exempt from the FLSA in their motion to dismiss, citing only a few STB decisions that did not clearly establish the basis for the STB’s jurisdiction or prove … established under the laws of a State” within the definition of “local government authority”).

Crescent Beach Club LLC v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 22, 2020

[or] where the later sworn assertion addresses an issue that was not, or was not thoroughly or clearly, explored in the deposition. . . . … Clearly, the activity in which the plaintiff was engaged in that case did not cause “a substantial, or indeed any, physical change to the building” within the meaning of New York Labor Law § 240(1).

Chang v. New York City Board of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2019

“Words of general release are clearly operative not only as to all controversies and causes of action between the releasor and releasees which had, by that time, actually ripened into litigation … Plaintiff has not established that she suffered an adverse employment action.

Olson v. Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC

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

To establish a violation of the FDCPA, a plaintiff must establish that: “(1) the plaintiff is a consumer within the meaning of the [A]ct; (2) the defendant is a debt collector; and (3) the defendant must have engaged in … Accordingly, Kohl’s qualifies as a creditor under the FDCPA regardless of whether it ultimately owns the resulting debts. Id.

Mangino v. Town of Babylon

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 26, 2024

Perhaps if Defendants had clearly articulated their current challenges in a Rule 50 motion at trial, that might have spurred Plaintiff to pursue additional Monell theories. … Even assuming arguendo that Wilson and the Town Attorney qualify as final policymakers, the absence of any instructions identifying them as such is particularly problematic.

Corrow

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 14, 2026

or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint— (1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Here the objective prong is clearly satisfied, as this Court found in the Order dismissing the claims against NUMC. (See NUMC Dismissal at 12.)

Henry v. County Of Nassau

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 12, 2020

Nassau County’s License Options Plaintiff contends that “Nassau County residents who may not qualify for the Penal Law §400.00(2)(f) pistol license ‘to have and carry concealed, without regard … [state law] subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution

Won v. Amazon.com, Inc.

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

Amazon also argues that the parenthetical in § 4303(2) qualifies the “rights and benefits” protected, reaching only those provided in exchange for work performed. … No. 103-65(1) at 53 (1993) (explaining that later conflicts in the “Persian Gulf in 1990 and 1991 underscore the need for military personnel and employers to be able to understand clearly their rights and responsibilities

Kim v. Korean Air lines

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

I acknowledge that Judge Simandle has held that registration qualifies as consent to be sued in New Jersey, thus conferring general jurisdiction. Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Mylan Inc., 106 F. … At the outset, the Delta website does not qualify as a sufficient contact with New Jersey.

Lata

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 18, 2025

Thus, based on the allegations in the Complaint, plaintiffs qualify as “employees,” and the corporate and individual defendant qualify as their “employers” under the FLSA. … The allegations set forth in plaintiffs’ Complaint, as outlined above, clearly establish that plaintiffs were employees of the defendants.

United States v. Copeland

369 F. Supp. 2d 275 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 4, 2005

To qualify for such relief, an alien was required to show that he or she: (1) was a lawful permanent resident of the United States; (2) had an unrelinquished domicile of seven consecutive years; and (3) had not committed … It must be recognized as a fact of life that Service officers and Board members are no more immune than other persons to the influences that result in individual bias and predilection.

Ortiz v. New York City Housing Authority

22 F. Supp. 2d 15 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 19, 1998

Under those circumstances, the court held that the plaintiff should have adduced testimony from a qualified expert in the field of building security; absent such testimony, “the jury was left to speculate regarding the deficiencies … My only reason in doing that was to perhaps have things explained more clearly, to avoid any ambiguity, and any confusion, to have things clarified, to move the trial along.

Federal Deposit Insurance v. US Mortgage Corp.

132 F. Supp. 3d 369 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 15, 2015

In particular, the Condes allegedly provided false and misleading information to USMC in order to qualify for loan financing. USMC then allegedly supplied that same false information to AmTrust. … Such cases meet the standard established under New York law because the,lawyer clearly holds himself *388 out to be an expert in a particular area, reliance on the opinion by the third-party is the “end and aim” of the engagement

Gem Financial Service, Inc. v. City of New York

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

In any event, police searches of a business’s required records are not—as defendant suggests—entirely immune from Fourth Amendment scrutiny. … Plaintiff was obligated to establish lost profits with reasonable certainty.

Smith v. Bell

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 12, 2022

However, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has “clearly stated that the AEDPA limitations period will only be [equitably] tolled in ‘rare and exceptional circumstance[s].’” Bolarinwa v. … To qualify for equitable tolling, a habeas petitioner must establish “‘(1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way and prevented timely filing.’”

Johns v. City of New York

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 12, 2024

maintain an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that ‘the conduct complained of [was] committed by a person acting under color of state law,’ and that the conduct ‘deprived [him] of rights, privileges, or immunities … [l]aws that impose only incidental burdens on interstate commerce . . . are subject to a much more forgiving standard,” and will be upheld “unless the challenger shows that the burden imposed on interstate commerce is clearly

Kruger v. Virgin Atlantic Airways, Ltd.

976 F. Supp. 2d 290 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2013

Curiously, it has not been clearly established that New York law governs this contract. The contract that parties have provided to this court contains no choice of law clause. (See Conditions of Carriage.) … “When a contract clearly identifies a single document, it eliminates all reasonable doubt and thus qualifies as an effective incorporation.” Id.; see also Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. v. C.A.

Aguirre v. Best Care Agency, Inc.

961 F. Supp. 2d 427 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 16, 2013

The article clearly indicates that it is based on Plaintiffs lawsuit. (Id. (stating “[i]n her lawsuit” and “the suit says”).) … In order to qualify for an H-1B visa, Plaintiff had to be a member of a specialty occupation. 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(15)(H)(i)(b); see also 20 C.F.R. § 655.700 (a). .

Hwang v. Couple Spa 65, Inc.

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

Dec. 20, 2017) (“[T]he ADA clearly applies to private commercial websites which (as here) operate in tandem with the merchant’s conventional (i.e., brick and mortar) places of public accommodation.”). … Because (1) plaintiff’s blindness qualifies as a disability under the ADA, (2) the Website is a place of public accommodation, and (3) defendant denied plaintiff full and equal enjoyment of the Website on account of her

Locascio v. United States

372 F. Supp. 2d 304 · District Court, E.D. New York · May 25, 2005

Cardinale proffered the testimony of a witness he sought to qualify as an expert who would give his opinion as to what should be heard of a word on an intercepted conversation. … LoCascio The relevance of this recitation to this motion is difficult to fathom beyond the implication that having decided post-trial motions adversely to LoCascio establishes my bias against him.