Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersnynd

2,281 results

0.50s

  • Dees v. Zurlo

    District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 11, 2024

    immunity. … Any such amended complaint, which shall supersede and replace in its entirety the original Complaint filed by Plaintiffs, must contain a caption that clearly identifies, by name, each individual that Plaintiffs are suing

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Chapman v. John Doe (One)

    District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 3, 2019

    , or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United States." … Only "persons" may act under the color of state law, a defendant in a § 1983 action must qualify as a "person."

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Kovian v. Fulton County National Bank & Trust Co.

    100 F. Supp. 2d 129 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 30, 2000

    Here is a caveat, however: the mere fact that a corporation benefits from an illegal scheme will not establish that it participated as a ‘central figure’ in that scheme. Id. … Moyses and Pratt certainly qualify as high ranking officers of the Bank; while the former was its vice-president, the latter was its president.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Merritt v. Sackett

    17 F. Cas. 140 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 27, 1849

    The principle upon *141 •which he is well known to have uniformly insisted is, that the admiralty jurisdiction in personam extends to all maritime contracts; and the contract in question is clearly of that character, — whether … In order, however, to justify this disclaimer, it became necessary for him to qualify the general principle above mentioned, affirming the admiralty jurisdiction over all contracts in their nature maritime, and virtually

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • T.I.M.E.-DC, Inc. v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund

    580 F. Supp. 621 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 15, 1984

    To the extent this Court has concluded that TIME-DC has established irreparable injury in the preliminary injunction context, it has established that necessary to avoid arbitration. … S.E.C., 609 F.2d 570 , 576-77 (2d Cir.1979), arbitration clearly is inappropriate. I.A.M. National Pension Fund v.

    Cited 31 timesPublished
  • Wanamaker v. Columbian Rope Co.

    907 F. Supp. 522 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 30, 1995

    Plaintiff himself does not suggest that there was another position within Columbian for which he was qualified, but was not considered. … Here, as just discussed, plaintiff Wanamaker, an attorney, was not qualified to hold any other available *533 position with Columbian.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Flores

    District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 9, 2026

    , when he protected class; 2) that he was qualified for the position answered a jury summons in Bronx County. … “A judge will not be deprived of immunity to suit in federal court, and Congress did not immunity because the action he took was in error, was done abrogate the states’ immunity in enacting 42 U.S.C. § 1983. maliciously,

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Bath Petroleum Storage, Inc. v. Sovas

    309 F. Supp. 2d 357 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 19, 2004

    To qualify for this privilege, the documents must be (1) predecisional, and (2) deliberative. Grand Cent. P’ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473, 482 (2d. Cir.1999). … However, if that interpretation were correct, then this clause would be redundant. 42 U.S.C. § 300h-l clearly establishes that a state can independently administer a UIC program only if it obtains EPA approval.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Donovan v. CSEA Local Union 1000, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees

    594 F. Supp. 188 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 19, 1984

    Were the present regularly scheduled election less than eleven months away, the equities would lie more clearly in CSEA’s favor. See Donovan v. … In Wirtz against Hotel, Motel and Club Employees’ Union, 391 U.S. 492 , 88 S.Ct. 1743 , 20 L.Ed.2d 763 (1968), the Supreme Court established that once a violation was established, a prima facie case had been made out that

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Czerwinski v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision

    District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 15, 2019

    Cir. 1998).3 An employee need not lodge a formal complaint for a complaint to qualify as a protected activity. See Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc., 202 F.3d 560, 566 (2d Cir. 2000). … The EEOC complaint is clearly Title VII protected activity of which Defendant was aware. This satisfies the first two elements of the prima facie case.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Myers v. Saxton

    District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 20, 2023

    The Court therefore agrees with Magistrate Judge Stewart that “qualified immunity is plainly appropriate on this claim.” (Dkt. No. 97, at 23); cf., Ahlers v. … Rabinowitz, 684 F.3d 53, 66 (2d Cir. 2012) (applying qualified immunity after undertaking, “for the first time . . . a balancing analysis with regard to the right of a civilly committed person to be free from unreasonable

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • United States v. 25.202 Acres of Land & Building

    860 F. Supp. 2d 165 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 9, 2010

    In this case, both parties intend to establish the value of the subject property through expert testimony. In Daubert v. … That clearly is an incorrect assumption. The Government also challenges the way that Mr.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Faiaz v. Colgate University

    64 F. Supp. 3d 336 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 24, 2014

    As stated above, the EGP clearly covers plaintiffs alleged conduct, thus, section VII was not violated. … Clearly, there is no “respondeat superior” without the underlying liability. Alexander v. Westbury Union Free School Dist., 829 F.Supp.2d 89, 112 (E.D.N.Y.2011).

    Cited 30 timesPublished
  • J & J Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Picarazzi

    793 F. Supp. 1104 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 19, 1992

    The installation itself in my opinion could not have been performed by qualified sheet metal workers. It is the sloppiest installation I have seen in my 15-year career. … Defendant argues that the expenditure of public monies is clearly a matter of public concern.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Carris v. First Student, Inc.

    132 F. Supp. 3d 321 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 18, 2015

    Clearly, Plaintiff has misunderstood the need to file a motion to amend, rather than merely an amended complaint, under the circumstances. … “[A] qualifying custom consists of a ‘longstanding practice’ that ‘constitutes the ‘standard operating procedure’ of the local governmental entity.’ ” Chin, 575 F.Supp.2d at 561 (quoting Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch.

    Vacated in part, on other grounds by Carris v. First Student, Inc., 682 F. App'x 30 (2017)Cited 36 timesPublished
  • Walker v. Rosa

    District Court, N.D. New York · May 6, 2025

    immunity by Congress.” … Under the doctrine established in Ex parte Young .. .

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Dougal v. Lewicki

    District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 3, 2023

    The undersigned has reviewed plaintiff's IFP application and determines that he financially qualifies to proceed IFP." … A municipal policy or custom may be established where the facts show: (1) a formal policy, officially promulgated by the municipality; (2) an action taken by an official who is responsible for establishing

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Bowen v. Kijakazi

    District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 16, 2022

    The plaintiff has the burden of establishing disability at the first four steps. … However, this standard is a very deferential standard of review, “even more so than the ‘clearly erroneous standard.’” Brault, 683 F.3d at 448.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Teator

    District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 17, 2025

    The complaint further fails to establish this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction as plaintiff has not established "| federal question or diversity jurisdiction. … Plaintiff has failed to establish federal question or diversity jurisdiction.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Poulos v. Annucci

    District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 25, 2021

    Karandy, who has the sole authority to determine whether Plaintiff should be sent to an outside hospital or receive diagnostic tests; (4) in any event, Defendant Brunelle is entitled to qualified immunity with regard to Plaintiff … immunity because (a) her conduct was a proprietary, not a governmental, function, thereby foreclosing any qualified immunity, and (b) even if the Court were to determine her conduct amounts to a governmental function, her

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.