Case law

Yong Ki Hong v. KBS America, Inc.

951 F. Supp. 2d 402 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 24, 2013

The Kwon letter was clearly written in furtherance of settling the conflict. … establish what rate plaintiffs paid after the move to Queens. .

Laface v. E. Suffolk Boces

349 F. Supp. 3d 126 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 15, 2018

"To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must show: (1) [his] employer is subject to the ADA; (2) [he] is disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (3) [he] is otherwise qualified to perform … In a motion to dismiss, "the plaintiff's pleading need not clearly establish that the defendant harbored retaliatory intent. It is sufficient to allege facts which could reasonably support an inference to that effect."

Tardd v. Brookhaven National Laboratory

407 F. Supp. 2d 404 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jan 7, 2006

White alleges that he was well qualified for the position based on his long tenure at BNL and his background and experience. According to White, he was the only internal BNL employee qualified for the position. … As to an Implied Employment Contract Under New York law, “absent an agreement establishing a fixed duration, an employment relationship is presumed to be a hiring at will, terminable at any time by either party.”

T.W. v. New York State Board of Law Examiners

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

The Second Circuit established a six-part “arm of the state” test in Mancuso v. … To state a claim for Title II discrimination, T.W. must establish (1) that she is a “qualified individual” with a disability; (2) that the Board is subject to the ADA; and (3) that she was denied the opportunity to participate

Esperanza v. City of N.Y.

325 F. Supp. 3d 288 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 12, 2018

Where officers arrested a plaintiff without a warrant and without probable cause, the doctrine of qualified immunity, which shields government officials performing discretionary functions "from liability for civil damages … insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known," Harlow v.

Ortiz v. Hasper

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

In that vein, I note that settled case law guided my dismissal of the state law battery claim against Hasper in light of the finding that Hasper is protected by qualified immunity. … qualified immunity); Harsco v. Segui, 91 F.3d 337, 349 (2d Cir. 1996) (dismissing respondeat superior claims where no underlying theory of liability survived); Edwards by Edwards v.

In Re Gibraltor Amusements, Ltd.

187 F. Supp. 931 · District Court, E.D. New York · Oct 21, 1960

Upon such a review this Court is subjected to the restraint of General Order 47 (11 U.S.C.A., following section 53) which provides that “The judge shall accept his [the Referee’s] findings of fact unless clearly erroneous … Without a showing that these contingencies had been satisfied, Rae would not qualify as a petitioning creditor.

Armstrong

District Court, E.D. New York · Dec 19, 2025

An action is frivolous as a matter of law when, inter alia, it is “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory” — that is, when it “lacks an arguable basis in law or a dispositive defense clearly exists on the face … Plaintiff has not established standing to bring these claims on his own behalf. He does not allege that he is himself a qualified individual with a disability or that he is entitled to any of these protections.

Moreland v. Van Buren GMC

93 F. Supp. 2d 346 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 23, 1999

Plaintiff, however, argues that “since Congress did not clearly show that [the] statute should be applied retroactively and in light of the ‘presumption against retroactive legislation’ ... … Even the Fredericks court conceded, however, that “the words of [Section 1441(c) ] clearly do not reach this far.” Id.

United States v. Sanders

17 F. Supp. 2d 141 · District Court, E.D. New York · Aug 27, 1998

NLRB, 301 U.S. 103, 132-33 , 57 S.Ct. 650, 656 , 81 L.Ed. 953 (1937) (“The publisher of a newspaper has no special immunity from the application of general laws. … First, § 1155(b) clearly provides that only “unauthorized” removal of aircraft wreckage is a violation. 2 Second, Mr.

United States v. McNiece

558 F. Supp. 612 · District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 3, 1983

Here, as noted above, the scientific data clearly demonstrate that a properly trained dog can distinguish among the “odors” of different persons and can detect the “odor” of a particular person on an object. … He has qualified in court before as Harrass II’s handler. Id. at 1119 .

Ayala v. Does 1-6

District Court, E.D. New York · Jul 25, 2024

to allege a violation of a clearly established Fourth Amendment right. … immunity.

Kureshy v. City University of New York

561 F. Supp. 1098 · District Court, E.D. New York · Apr 14, 1983

He has not clearly shown, however, that he was qualified for tenure under SIC standards. … Finally, plaintiff did not establish that he was qualified for promotion. Again, the standard for promotion to full professor required a record of “exceptional” achievement.

Sanders v. Siano

District Court, E.D. New York · Mar 26, 2021

“[S]ince qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that is typically asserted in an answer, as a general rule, the defense of qualified immunity cannot support the grant of a [Rule] 12(b)(6) motion.” … It would be premature to dismiss Sanders’ Fourth Amendment claim on qualified immunity grounds before the factual record is developed.

Sessoms v. The County of Suffolk

District Court, E.D. New York · May 1, 2023

“The issues on qualified immunity are: (1) whether plaintiff has shown facts making out violation of a constitutional right; (2) if so, whether that right was ‘clearly established’; and (3) even if the right was ‘clearly … “The right to be free from arrest without probable cause [is] clearly established . . . .” Id. at 157. The right to be free from unreasonable seizure of one’s person is also clearly established.

Hyped Holdings LLC v. United States of America

District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 19, 2023

Plaintiff improperly conflates “sovereign immunity” with “qualified immunity” and argues that a qualified immunity defense is premature. ECF No. 20 at 11–13. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Hill v. New York City Board of Education

808 F. Supp. 141 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 12, 1992

Furthermore, to establish this prima facie case of “discrimination in firing in violation of ... … Although defendants concede that plaintiff belongs to a protected class, that he was qualified for his position as a bus driver, and that he was discharged, they argue that the discharge did not occur “in *149 circumstances

Carmody v. Village of Rockville Centre

661 F. Supp. 2d 299 · District Court, E.D. New York · Sep 30, 2009

McKeon has asserted the defense of qualified immunity, which shields a government official from civil liability resulting from the performance of his discretionary functions where his conduct “did not violate plaintiffs clearly … qualified immunity grounds is inappropriate.”

Platsky v. Kilpatrick

806 F. Supp. 358 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 4, 1992

Kilpatrick’s memos clearly show her extreme bias and they clearly show that she thought of me as an organizer “type”, i.e., a political person of the Left. … However, the Supreme Court case law on this issue indicates, fairly clearly, that these ties to New York State are insufficient to constitute state action. See, e.g., Rendell-Baker v.

Shochat v. Weisz

797 F. Supp. 1097 · District Court, E.D. New York · Jun 23, 1992

The plaintiffs failed to establish that, at the time of their investment, the defendant knew that Wind Energy lacked the criteria necessary to qualify as a legitimate tax shelter. 9. … The plaintiffs failed to establish that, at the time of their investment, the defendant knew that Darby Coal lacked the criteria necessary to qualify as a legitimate tax shelter. 12.