Case law

Sullivan v. Kijakazi

District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 1, 2022

The plaintiff has the burden of establishing disability at the first four steps. … Plaintiff held a variety of short-term jobs, some of which did not qualify as substantial gainful activity (“SGA”). (Id.)

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Smith

798 F. Supp. 2d 412 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 20, 2011

Under the inherent power doctrine, the record establishes beyond question that Lynn Smith possessed actual knowledge of the Annuity Agreement as one of its signatories, the existence of that agreement was a material fact … Thus, the Court finds that David Stoelting, Kevin McGrath, and Jack Kaufman qualify as experienced litigators in the area of securities fraud equivalent to a partner in a law firm in the private sector of this area.

Green v. McKoy

District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 31, 2023

However, the letter refers to a “Jamel McGougain” not qualifying for treatment, as opposed to Shawn Green—Plaintiff’s name in this action. See id. … Mar. 5, 2018), at *9 (finding that “the brief loss of in-cell water privileges certainly does not qualify as a protected liberty interest” sufficient to make out a procedural due process claim).

Mines v. Saul

District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 30, 2021

Mar. 26, 2015) (“State agency physicians are qualified as experts in the evaluation of medical issues in disability claims. … evaluation and treatment from acceptable medical sources are especially helpful in establishing both the existence and severity of the impairment.”

Schillo v. Saul

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 29, 2020

The ALJ must clearly state the legal rules being applied and the weight being accorded to the evidence considered. Drysdale v. Colvin, No. 14-CV-722, 2015 WL 3776382, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. … Mar. 26, 2015) (“State agency physicians are qualified as experts in the evaluation of medical issues in disability claims.

Snyder v. Saul

District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 25, 2020

However, this standard is a very deferential standard of review, “even more so than the ‘clearly erroneous standard.’” Brault, 683 F.3d at 448. … If a plaintiff’s impairment “manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely,” such impairment does not qualify. Debra E. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 6:18-CV-513 (NAM), 2019 WL 4233162, at *6 (N.D.N.Y.

Furlow v. Saul

District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 23, 2019

If an impairment is found to meet, or qualify as medically or functionally equivalent to, a listed impairment, and the twelve-month durational requirement is satisfied, the claimant will be found to be disabled. 20 C.F.R … However, this standard is a very deferential standard of review “ – even more so than the ‘clearly erroneous standard.’” Brault, 683 F.3d at 448.

Spiezio v. Martinez

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 31, 2023

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s “conduct goes beyond negligence . . . as she was clearly and deliberately indifferent to Robert Amrhein’s constitutional rights given the grossly negligent and reckless manner in which … usage, of any State . . . 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

New Hope Family Services, Inc. v. James

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 28, 2022

As was stated quite clearly in the complaint, see Dkt. … accommodation,8 and neither Executive Law § 296(2)(a) nor Civil Rights 8 This conclusion finds further support from the Poole Action, where the Second Circuit expressed, in dicta, its skepticism of the idea that New Hope qualified

Leboeuf v. Edgewell Personal Care Company

District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 23, 2023

Here, Plaintiff has clearly alleged the facts necessary to support a price premium theory of injury. … See CDC, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases ("NCIRD"), Rhinoviruses, available at https://www.cdc.gov/ncird/rhinoviruses-common-cold.html (last visited Aug. 4, 2023).

Cayuga Nation v. Parker

District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 12, 2022

Defendants assert that because the harm asserted “is the loss of business revenues, and that harm is compensable with money damages, injunctive relief is clearly improper.” (Id.). … Losses to existing business, loss of customers, and “a decline in the opportunity for new business may qualify as irreparable harm.” Id. (citing, inter alia, John E. Andrus Mem’l, Inc. v. Daines, 600 F.

Merckx

District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 19, 2026

the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion; or 4. … Rooker-Feldman bars a narrow set of cases if, and only if, the party arguing the Doctrine can establish four elements. Here, Defendants cannot establish three of the four elements.

Kitler v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 4, 2025

It goes without saying that the acts taken by the Church, alone, are insufficient to establish liability. … However, Plaintiffs clearly state that such a claim is available for “all Plaintiffs.” Dkt. No. 52 at 28. “because the government’s enforcement efforts were hindered.”

Boisclair v. Saul

District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 11, 2020

“If a plaintiff’s ‘impairment manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, such impairment does not qualify.’” Capron v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 12-CV-1618, 2014 WL 581711, at *5 (N.D.N.Y. … The ALJ found that Plaintiff had failed to establish the frequency and intensity of seizure activity necessary to meet any part of Listing 11.02. (T. 18.)

Doe v. Zucker

District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 30, 2020

legally redressable injury, and (d) Petitioner has offered nothing to support his interpretation of the regulations as barring him from moving directly to another TAH from his current TAH (e.g., that such a move would not qualify … An allegation of future injury may suffice if the threatened injury is “clearly impending,” or there is a “‘substantial risk’ that the harm will occur.” Clapper v.

Bond v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 16, 2021

The ALJ concluded that plaintiff had not established any “severe” mental | impairment(s). R. at 18. … Thus, because the ALJ clearly considered | plaintiffs mental impairments as part of his larger RFC analysis, plaintiffs argument must be rejected. See, e.g., Hanson v. Comm’r of Soc.

DaCosta v. Wilmington Trust, N.A.

District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 29, 2019

LEGAL STANDARD FOR INITIAL REVIEW OF COMPLAINT Ordinarily, the finding that Plaintiff does not qualify for IFP status would end the Court’s discussion, and Plaintiff, in light of his pro se status … Citytrust Bancorp, Inc., 25 F.3d 1124, 1128 (2d Cir. 1994) (“It is well established that an amended complaint ordinarily supersedes the original and renders it of no legal effect.”). VI.

Gosier v. Saul

District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 4, 2020

However, this standard is 10 a very deferential standard of review, even more so than the 11 clearly erroneous standard, see Brault, 683 F.3d at 448. 12 To determine on appeal whether an … Woznicki 11 did not qualify as a treating physician, see Camarata v.

Megan Thomas Law, PLLC v. Syracuse Regional Airport Authority, Jason Mehl, and Jason Terreri

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 15, 2026

In the best of situations, a government actor can clearly explain why it believes speech it seeks to restrict to be disparaging. … Plaintiff has established a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. D.

Reaves v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 15, 2020

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. … The ALJ must clearly state the legal rules being applied and the weight being accorded to the evidence considered. Drysdale v. Colvin, No. 14-CV-722, 2015 WL 3776382, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 16, 2015) (citing Rivera v.