Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,748 results
1.59s
District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2019
Rule 52(a) further provides that such “[f]indings of fact, whether based on oral or other evidence, must not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and the reviewing court must give due regard to the trial court’s opportunity … In numerous places in the records, Plaintiff’s 3 Several of these “additional” roles and responsibilities (e.g., deli work, “party” room work) may have been part of an attempt by Plaintiff to qualify for the potentially
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Sep 27, 2024
Notably, the City also concedes that the Court “held that the City did not establish sufficient bases” for its “proffered objections to the scope and breadth of the plaintiff’s demands.” (Defs.’ MTC Fees Opp. at 2). … This qualifies as a successful motion to challenge the sufficiency of the City’s answers, and there was no substantial justification for the City’s failure to admit or deny because the record was clear; there was no explanation
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Sep 16, 2019
From there, the R&R applied the well-established principle, confirmed in Halberstam, that any member of a conspiracy, once established, can be held responsible for any act committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. … JASTA’s inclusion of societies and associations within its definition of “person” clearly indicates that the “person” committing an act of terrorism need not be the literal triggerman, as Defendants appear to suggest.
Cited 0 timesUnknownOliveras v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, E.D. New York · Feb 20, 2025
Freedman noted that he was “clearly traumatized and assessed his anxiety as “related to dealing with cancer.” (Id.) … There is nothing in the record establishing that Plaintiff’s visits with Dr. Freedman continued beyond September 2016.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCerticable Inc. v. Point 2 Point Communications Corporation
District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 7, 2024
The first argument is that the SAC’s patent and trademark infringement claims should be dismissed as to Krawczyk because they lack sufficient facts to establish his personal liability. (Defs.’ Mot. at 5–13.) … “The Noerr-Pennington doctrine generally immunizes from liability a party’s commencement of a prior court proceeding” with the exception of “sham” litigation that is “objectively baseless” and “intended to cause harm to
Cited 0 timesUnknownSecurities and Exchange Commission v. Xia
District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 8, 2022
Furthermore, “amendment is presumed not to work a change in the underlying substantive law unless an intent to make such a change is clearly expressed.” … Independently and combined, these misleading or false representations and omissions about the Projects created the illusion that Defendants were well-qualified to execute their scheme.
Cited 0 timesUnknownState Of New York v. Donald Trump
District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 14, 2020
Legal Standard To qualify for certification, a class must meet the prerequisites outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), including nu- merosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy. Fed. R. Civ. … Second, the proposed Class definition is not overbroad and is clearly ascertainable.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Nov 14, 2020
Legal Standard To qualify for certification, a class must meet the prerequisites outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), including nu- merosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy. Fed. R. Civ. … Second, the proposed Class definition is not overbroad and is clearly ascertainable.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Mar 10, 2022
Oct. 29, 2021) (“The parties’ briefs assume that New York law controls, and such implied consent is sufficient to establish choice of law.” (quoting Alphonse Hotel Corp. v. … Br. at 6, which Defendants appear to concede qualifies as a limited express warranty, see Defs.’ Br. at 13.
Cited 0 timesUnknown895 F. Supp. 460 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 4, 1995
In response, the government proffered the testimony of James Glauner, a special agent with the DEA, who has been qualified as an expert on smuggling in a number of cases in this and other districts. … On the contrary, that opinion clearly states that when the court wishes to impose the enhancement over the defendant’s objection, the court “must review the evidence and make independent findings necessary to establish a
Reversed on other grounds by United States v. Charles O. Shonubi, 103 F.3d 1085 (1997)Cited 35 timesPublishedSnoddy v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, E.D. New York · May 18, 2022
The Second Circuit has described substantial-evidence review as “a very deferential standard of review—even more so than the ‘clearly erroneous’ standard.” Brault v. Soc. Sec. Admin., Comm’r of Soc. … Plaintiff’s asthma did not qualify as a per se disability under section 3.00 (respiratory disorders) because the emergency room visit requirement was not met. AR 19, 247; see 20 C.F.R. § Pt. 404, Subpt.
Cited 0 timesUnknownYashua Ank Bey El v. CitiMortgage, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 11, 2025
App’x 289, 291 (3d Cir. 2012) (holding that “to qualify as a ‘consumer of credit,’ one must, at minimum, have engaged in business with the creditor. . . . … Here, Plaintiff fails to establish that Defendant made any material misrepresentation of fact.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCohen v. Capital One Funding, LLC
District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 28, 2020
Although Defendants are not national banks, the Amended Complaint and documents on which it relies clearly show that Defendants were either subsidiaries of Capital One, as with CO Funding, … Because the NBA completely preempted state law claims challenging interest charged by national banks, and the alleged unlawful fees qualified as interest under the NBA, both
Cited 0 timesUnknownPC-41 DOE v. Poly Prep Country Day School
District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 22, 2021
First, the Court of Appeals pre-In re WTC did not establish any such general requirement. Not in Robinson, not in Gallewski, not in McCann, and not in Hymowitz. … This Court declines to read into the rule clearly articulated by the Court of Appeals a limitation not found therein.
Cited 0 timesUnknownLavin v. Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 19, 2023
To be sure, the December 2019 press release clearly directed readers, via hyperlink, to the February 2019 press release for further information regarding the February 2019 flight. … For the reasons below, I conclude that plaintiffs fail to establish these factors, and I therefore decline to certify my order for interlocutory appeal. A.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Jun 7, 2024
Dec. 15, 2022) (“The party seeking a fee award bears the burden of establishing the reasonableness of the rates charged and the necessity for the hours spent”). … “However, Plaintiff has not established that Defendants’ non-compliance has been entirely willful.” Id. at *4.
Cited 0 timesUnknownYCF Trading Inc. v. Skullcandy, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 27, 2025
The Amazon Reports do not constitute opinion Defendants argue that the Amazon Reports constitute nonactionable opinion because they “do not imply any unknown facts” and “clearly state[] that the factual … Supp. 3d 280, 305 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) (“[A] defamatory statement of fact cannot be immunized by pairing it with ‘I believe.’” (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Thomas H. v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Mar 31, 2021
Based on the ambiguity of the word “work,” it appears that Plaintiff and the ALJ did not clearly understand each other. … The ALJ 11 The ALJ also found that the evidence does not establish clinical signs of fibromyalgia, that Plaintiff’s history of “left thumb trigger finger” does not meet the duration requirement to establish a
Cited 0 timesUnknownAgudath Israel of America v. Hochul
District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 6, 2021
The Supreme Court enjoined the enforcement of the fixed capacity limits pending the Second Circuit appeals, having found that “[t]he applicants have clearly established their entitlement … “To qualify as a prevailing party, a plaintiff must obtain at least some relief on the merits of his claim.” Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield Cnty., Inc. v. Litchfield Historic Dist.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. New York · Apr 19, 2026
Nov. 17, 2022) (“[T]he general concepts of providing directions for exercises and varying exercise programs are clearly abstract ideas”). … Supp. 2d 155, 179 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (“[U]nder Rule 702, the district court must make several determinations before allowing expert testimony: (1) whether the witness is qualified to be an expert; (2) whether the opinion is
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna