Case law

Graham v. New York City Department of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 20, 2025

See, e.g., Parada, 753 F.3d at 68 (finding district court properly converted motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment where the district court “clearly notified [the then-pro se plaintiff] that the [defendant … “An employee’s decision to report discriminatory behavior cannot immunize that employee from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all employees experience.”

Frederick v. United States

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

. § 924(c), should be vacated since “Hobbs Act robbery . . . no longer qualifies as a ‘crime of violence.’” … The court found that the evidence at trial clearly established that petitioner brandished a firearm in connection with the attempted robbery at Satellite Communications and that petitioner

United States v. Gigante

996 F. Supp. 194 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 5, 1998

In the instant case, the evidence clearly supports a finding of competency under the preponderance standard. III. … Gigante’s treating psychiatrists) and other qualified clinicians over the past decade.

McDonald's Corporation v. Vanderbilt Atlantic Holdings LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2024

Instead, the Circuit found that the issue of the parties’ compliance with the ORA’s cooperation clause “is—whether easy or difficult to resolve, and whether or not requiring consideration of appraisal methodologies—clearly … As discussed above, awareness does not absolve Defendant of its Rule 26 obligations and does not establish harmlessness.

Minto v. Molloy University

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 26, 2019

Counsel’s illness is clearly beyond his control, but his more than five-week delay in initiating service was not beyond his control. … Thus, the court will treat this first element as established.

McDonald's Corporation v. Vanderbilt Atlantic Holdings LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2024

Instead, the Circuit found that the issue of the parties’ compliance with the ORA’s cooperation clause “is—whether easy or difficult to resolve, and whether or not requiring consideration of appraisal methodologies—clearly … As discussed above, awareness does not absolve Defendant of its Rule 26 obligations and does not establish harmlessness.

Bacchus v. Molloy University

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 26, 2019

Counsel’s illness is clearly beyond his control, but his more than five-week delay in initiating service was not beyond his control. … Thus, the court will treat this first element as established.

Mathis v. United Homes, LLC

607 F. Supp. 2d 411 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 20, 2009

Bank “are clearly not among the class which the statute[s are] intended to protect, but rather are the parties whose conduct the statute[s are] intended to regulate.” Quality Built Constr., Inc., 309 F.Supp.2d at 778 . … 1985 provides in relevant part: If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire ... for the purpose of depriving ... any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities

Quartararo v. J. King Food Service Professionals, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2021

Defendants have thus failed to establish that there is no triable issue of fact. (Id.) … They also clearly include (7) gross wages and (8) applicable deductions.

Dana-Simone Williams v. The Law Offices of Frederick K. Brewington, Frederick K. Brewington, in his individual and professional capacities, and Precilla Lockett, in her individual and professional capacities

District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 12, 2026

Pursuant to the text of Title VII, the Brewington Firm must qualify as a Title VII employer in 2019 or 2020 for claims concerning conduct alleged to take place in 2020, and must qualify as a Title VII employer in 2020 or … the numerical threshold to qualify as an “employer” for Title VII coverage during the timeframe of Williams’ claims.

Sewell v. Molloy University

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 26, 2019

Counsel’s illness is clearly beyond his control, but his more than five-week delay in initiating service was not beyond his control. … Thus, the court will treat this first element as established.

The Brooklyn Union Gas Company, doing business as National Grid NY v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., The City of New York, The United States of America, The United States Department of Defense, The United States Department of the Navy, The United States Department of the Army, The United States Coast Guard, The Federal Maritime Commission, The United States Postal Service, The United States General Services Administration, Astoria Generating Company, L.P., Ballantyne Legacy Holdings, LLC, Bayside Fuel Oil Corporation, Beazer East, Inc., The Brink’s Company, Brooklyn Improvement Company, Dun and Bradstreet Corp., Hess Corp., The Kraft Heinz Company, Mciz Corp., 36-2nd J Corp., 15 Second Avenue LLC

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 30, 2026

However, Brooklyn Union contends that the “series-qualifier canon” supports Brooklyn Union’s argument that section 10(j), “when read in harmony with” section 10(a), “clearly requires the parties to come to an agreement … In response, Brooklyn Union argues it did not breach the Agreement nor the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, because (i) Phillips has not established that the parties agreed to apply the Agreement to RA costs and

Gallego

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 27, 2026

[as] the device is clearly subject to the federal, device-specific requirement of adhering to the standards contained in its individual, federally approved PMA.” Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. … Plaintiff argues that the mechanical pump malfunction and/or drivetrain failure of Decedent’s X2 Pump qualified as a “device malfunction” that required recording “by the FDA” in the X2 Pump’s design.

Jones v. Sheriff of Suffolk County

District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 11, 2021

confirmed through a medical database that plaintiff had a prescription for these medications. 2 Since I am dismissing all of plaintiff’s claims against these defendants on the merits, I need not reach defendants’ qualified … immunity arguments.

Barrett v. Berryhill

286 F. Supp. 3d 402 · District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 14, 2018

Consequently, the ALJ determined that plaintiff did not qualify for disability benefits. C. Analysis Plaintiff challenges the Commissioner's decision that he is not disabled on several grounds. … Kerker's treatment of plaintiff ( Id. at 17 ), he did not clearly state whether he relied on Dr. Kerker's opinion, and, if so, to what extent.

United States v. Trotter

321 F. Supp. 3d 337 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 12, 2018

"[M]any of the standard conditions are so clearly necessary to supervised release, that the term 'discretionary' may be a misleading, if technically accurate, modifier for the standard conditions." … A supervisee must go six months without a positive drug test to qualify. Id. Whether this limit is a hard-and-fast rule for all cases is not clear.

Division 1181 Amalgamated Transit Union - New York Employees Pension Fund v. New York City Department of Education

District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 2, 2020

Plaintiffs have adequately established standing with respect to their ERISA claims. … ERISA defines a pension plan as “any plan . . . established or maintained by an employer . . .

Donohue v. Manetti

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2025

Brady would not have been qualified to discontinue Plaintiff’s medication. (Defs. 56.1 ¶ 64; Pl. 56.1 Opp. ¶ 64.) Because Dr. … Brady’s reaction is insufficient to establish that she acted recklessly or intentionally in giving him an NSAID. Plaintiff has thus failed to establish that Ms.

Turner v. Bell

District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 21, 2021

This 28-month delay qualifies as “presumptively prejudicial” and triggers the full Barker inquiry. United States v. Moreno, 789 F.3d 72, 82 (2d Cir. 2015). … at 623 (establishing the harmless error standard in habeas proceedings).

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Metro Pain Specialists P.C.

District Court, E.D. New York · May 20, 2022

Sys. of Ala., 386 F.3d at 427–28 (“Clearly, our decision in Baldwin-United did not create a blanket rule or presumption that a federal court in any multidistrict action may enjoin parallel state proceedings. . . . … arbitration proceedings ‘are not enough’ to establish irreparable harm” where Plaintiffs could be “fully compensated through money damages.”