Case law

Mitchell v. Cuomo

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

Magistrate Judge Stewart also concludes that, even if Defendants Mahuta and Miller had violated Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights, they would be entitled to qualified immunity. … He does argue that his inability to point to evidence to support his First Amendment claims or to challenge the Defendants’ arguments on qualified immunity demonstrates that he should be appointed counsel.

Cohen v. Richardson

District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 5, 2024

No. 1 (the “Complaint”), pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 12”), and on Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity grounds, Dkt. … As an initial matter, Cushman’s arguments concerning qualified immunity and Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity are unavailing.

Gildor v. United States Postal Service

491 F. Supp. 2d 305 · District Court, N.D. New York · Apr 27, 2007

Assuming these four prongs were sufficient to establish equitable estoppel, Plaintiff would have established that his claim to equitable estoppel could succeed. 2. Affirmative Misconduct Requirement i. … This Act clearly attempts to minimize the differences between USPS and private companies providing similar products and services.

Weilburg v. Rodgers

District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 17, 2024

“Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages when one of two conditions is satisfied: (a) the defendant’s action did not violate clearly established law, or (b) it was objectively reasonable … Defendants have the burden of establishing qualified immunity. Vincent v. Yelich, 718 F.3d 157, 166 (2d Cir. 2013).

Schwenk v. Kavanaugh

4 F. Supp. 2d 110 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 5, 1998

However, defendants did not allege qualified immunity as an affirmative defense, nor have they asserted qualified immunity in motions or submissions. Therefore, it will not be considered. See Gomez v. … [i]n short, her testimony fails to establish that she suffers from any concrete emotional problems.”) 2.

In Re Hager

90 B.R. 584 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 22, 1988

Appellant has failed to establish that the bankruptcy’s judge’s findings as to the value of the property or its use as a principal residence *588 were clearly erroneous. 3 Mere assertion of error does not relieve appellant … of the burden of showing that the judge’s findings were clearly erroneous.

Trefzger

District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 25, 2026

Plaintiff alleges that he suffers from two mental health disorders which qualify as a disability under the ADA, see id. at 2, and that moving to another office “would and has cause[d] significant damage to me and my well … App’x at 335). 2 Although Plaintiff does not indicate which provision of the ADA he is bringing his suit under, allegations of employment discrimination are “clearly governed by Title I of the ADA.”

Canadian St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians v. New York

640 F. Supp. 203 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 30, 1986

The Supreme Court held: [W]hen Congress establishes such an agency, authorizes it to engage in commercial and business transactions with the public, and permits it to “sue and be sued”, it cannot be lightly assumed that restrictions … Rather if the general authority to “sue and be sued” is to be delimited by implied exceptions, it must be clearly shown that certain types of suits are not consistent with the statutory or constitutional scheme, that an implied

Pray v. Breyette

District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 6, 2022

Turning to Breyette’s qualified immunity argument, because 6 “[s]ummary judgment should not be granted on the basis of a qualified immunity defense … established law,” O’Bert ex rel.

Avitabile v. Beach

277 F. Supp. 3d 326 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 28, 2017

Although absolute prosecutorial immunity would bar a § 1983 damages claim against the District Attorney in his individual capacity and Eleventh Amendment immunity might shield him from a § 1983 claim for money damages in … Equally important at this stage of the proceedings, the personal experience set out in Avitabile’s affidavit is just one data point and does not, on its own, clearly establish that these devices are “in common use today”

Rother v. NYS Department of Corrections & Community Supervision

970 F. Supp. 2d 78 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 4, 2013

Plaintiff was passed over in favor of male employees for overtime assignments for which she was qualified. Id. ¶ 51. … and/or qualified immunity.”

Henchey v. Town of North Greenbush

831 F. Supp. 960 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 30, 1993

While the phrase “otherwise qualified” is not defined in the Act, Gilbert, 949 F.2d at 641 , the basic factors to be considered in conducting this inquiry are well established by case law. … The cases cited by defendants are clearly distinguishable as they apply specifically to handicap discrimination by the federal government under section 501 of the Act. See Prewitt v. U.S.

Lopez v. Gerace

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

"To balance the need for accountability and the potential chilling effect, 'the Supreme Court established qualified immunity as an affirmative defense to § 1983 claims.'" Id. (quotation omitted). … "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 person

Boyd

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 22, 2026

First, any Section 1983 claims against New York State, the DMV, or any of the Defendants in their official capacity must fail because they are clearly barred by sovereign immunity. See supra Part IV(A)(1). … Turner personally participated in conduct violating a clearly established constitutional right; and 4) her state law claims, assuming Plaintiff adequately pleads the aforementioned federal claims; and it is further

Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Comfortex Corp.

44 F. Supp. 2d 145 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 3, 1999

AMF, Inc., 782 F.2d 995 , 1001 (Fed.Cir.1986). 15 Clearly, a patentee who uses a patent to violate the antitrust laws is guilty of patent misuse; if a patentee’s action does not qualify as an antitrust violation, however, … Nevertheless, commentators have recognized that “a close relationship clearly exists between the misuse doctrine and the antitrust laws.” 6 Donald S. Chisum, Chisum on Patents, § 19.04, at 19-300 (1994).

Davis v. Luft

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

qualified immunity. … An officer is entitled to such immunity even when evidence of a constitutional violation exists, “unless plaintiff can . . . show that the right violated was ‘clearly established at the time of

Dickinson v. Warren County Sheriff

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 22, 2021

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that York is entitled to qualified immunity. See Defs.’ Mem. of Law at 18–20. Defendants are correct. … Qualified immunity “shields public officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Levine v. New York State Police

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 26, 2022

did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known, or (2) it was objectively reasonable to believe that [his] acts did not violate these clearly established rights.” … Sept. 17, 2013) (denying motion to dismiss on qualified immunity where defendant “only include[d] the legal standard for establishing 11 Regardless of the type of relief sought by Levine, the Eleventh Amendment

TC Systems Inc. v. Town of Colonie, New York

213 F. Supp. 2d 171 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 19, 2002

of establishing a cost-based fee. … Accordingly, Kravtin is qualified as an expert in this case. 2.

Keck v. New York State Office of Alcoholism & Substance Abuse Services

10 F. Supp. 2d 194 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 24, 1998

Is Plaintiff Qualified Under the ADA ? In addition to establishing that she is disabled, plaintiff must demonstrate that she is otherwise qualified to perform the job in question. See Borkowski v. Valley Cent. … However, that fact is not clearly established.