Case law

M.B. v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

130 F. Supp. 3d 654 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 11, 2015

Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to establish that Mr. … Bellizzi is qualified to render such an opinion. In Nna v. Am.

Brown v. The State of New York

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

immunity. … Here, questions of fact would preclude granting summary judgment based on qualified immunity for the alleged violation of this clearly established right.

Lettieri v. New York State Police

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

Plaintiff's Complaint to qualified immunity. (Id.) As a result of the Court's prior decisions (Dkt. … Local Rule 7.1 Fourth, Plaintiff argues that Bertram is not entitled to qualified Before reciting the material facts of this case, the Court immunity because it was not objectively reasonable to believe must address Plaintiff's

Hahn v. County of Otsego

820 F. Supp. 54 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 6, 1993

In Kendrick , the First Circuit Court of Appeals found that statements made by the alleged victim did not automatically establish the requisite probable cause to arrest someone. … The County defendants did not move to dismiss based on qualified immunity, and the court has not considered that issue.

In re Walrath

175 F. 243 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 4, 1910

The trustee duly qualified and acted. Parsnow demanded an examination of such bankrupt, and such examination was had. It appears there were no assets. No other creditor’ proved a claim. … Such infant is clearly included in the term “any person who owes debts,” etc.

Nunez v. Horn

72 F. Supp. 2d 24 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 29, 1999

action the initial inquiry must focus on ... (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person *27 of the rights, privileges, or immunities … Id. at 4, 36. 1 The evidence clearly shows that the treatment provided by the defendant was reasonable and was not administered with the intent to unnecessarily and wantonly inflict pain upon the plaintiff.

Lawrence v. Sherman

District Court, N.D. New York · Jul 18, 2022

immunity. … [Section] 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead that each 5 In light of the above holding, it is unnecessary to reach the issue of qualified immunity. 10 Government-official

Lavigna v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

736 F. Supp. 2d 504 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 24, 2010

The plaintiff must demonstrate that she was “otherwise qualified” for the job, meaning “she is able to perform the essential function of that job, either with or without a reasonable accommodation.” Shannon v. N.Y. … In general, ERISA empowers plan beneficiaries to bring civil actions to recover any benefits owed under the terms of a qualifying employee welfare benefit plan. See Shea v. Wells Fargo Armored Serv.

Panagopoulos v. New York State Department of Transportation

172 F. Supp. 3d 597 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 24, 2016

As a general rule, state governments and their agencies may not be sued in federal court unless they have waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity or Congress has validly abrogated that immunity. Woods v. … Sept. 2, 2014) (“Even under the more lenient standard applied in retaliation cases, courts have found that counseling memoranda do not qualify as adverse employment, actions.”); Cody v.

The Estate of Joseph P. King v. Ward

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

“Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Qualified immunity also applies when “it was ‘objectively reasonable’ for [the officer] to believe that [his or her] actions were lawful at the time of the challenged act.” Betts v.

Baron v. Lambert

District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 23, 2025

It's time to hold government workers accountable when they violate and deprive universal rights and civil liberty, Americans Against Qualified Immunity. … An action is legally frivolous when it is based on “an indisputably meritless legal theory” or “a dispositive defense clearly exists on the face of the complaint.” Livingston v.

Thompson v. New York State Corrections and Community Supervision

District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 14, 2022

It is well-settled that Congress did not abrogate states' immunity through Section 1983. Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 343-45 (1979). State immunity extends to state agencies. … Because it is well established that DOCCS is a New York State agency immune from suit under Section 1983, see, e.g., Ala. v. Pugh, 438 U.S. 781, 782 (1978); Santiago v. New York State Dep't of Corr.

Nunez v. Horn

72 F. Supp. 2d 24 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 29, 1999

action the initial inquiry must focus on ... (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person *27 of the rights, privileges, or immunities … Id. at 4, 36. [1] The evidence clearly shows that the treatment provided by the defendant was reasonable and was not administered with the intent to unnecessarily and wantonly inflict pain upon the plaintiff.

Johnson v. Tedford

616 F. Supp. 2d 321 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 16, 2007

While the court may conduct a discretionary review pursuant to any standard it sees fit, this court has consistently applied a “clearly erroneous” standard. Id. … Establishing deliberate indifference requires a showing of more than simple negligence.

Deshais v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

956 F. Supp. 230 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 26, 1997

Even if Plaintiffs are able to establish that they were qualified to assume another available position, they must still demonstrate that they were discharged under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination … To accomplish this, the defendant must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, the reasons for the plaintiffs rejection.

Hoblock v. Albany County Board of Elections

487 F. Supp. 2d 90 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 24, 2006

section 1983, a plaintiff must allege that (1) the defendant was acting “under color of state law” at the time the conduct complained of occurred, and (2) that the conduct deprived the plaintiff of “ ‘rights, privileges or immunities … Thus, now a court should establish, to begin with, a “lodestar” or the number of hours reasonably spent by counsel in the litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate, and then determine if an adjustment is warranted

Kaufman v. Columbia Memorial Hospital

2 F. Supp. 3d 265 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 19, 2014

ADEA and NYSHRL Age Discrimination Claims “In order to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, [a plaintiff] must show (1) that she was within the protected age group, (2) that she was qualified for the position … A clearly written contract, granting privileges to a doctor for a fixed period of time, and agreeing not to withdraw those privileges except for specified cause, will be enforced.

Gerken v. Gordon

District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 6, 2024

"Absolute immunity for judges is 'firmly established' for acts 'committed within their judicial jurisdiction.'" Peoples v. Leon, 63 F.4th 132, 138 (2d Cir. 2023) (quoting Cleavinger v. … Plaintiff has not presented more than conclusory allegations to establish that Defendant Gordon was acting absent all jurisdiction. Defendant Gordon is, therefore, entitled to absolute immunity. See, e.g., King v.

LAMAR ADVERTISING OF PENN, LLC v. Pitman

573 F. Supp. 2d 700 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 6, 2008

To make such a showing, plaintiff must establish that it had a “clear entitlement” to the variance under state law. See id.; Zahra v. … This clearly is not a class protected by section 1985(3). Plaintiff adduces no evidence that the defendants’ actions were motivated by invidiously discriminatory animus.

Dean v. Pepsi-Cola Binghamton Bottlers

894 F. Supp. 600 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 16, 1995

After this has been established, the burden of production switches to the defendant to show that there was a legitimate and nondiseriminatory reason for its actions. … her employer’s normal performance requirements was clearly a question for the jury.