Case law

Cayuga Nation v. New York State Gaming Commission

District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 31, 2025

renders them immune from suit.” … “There are three exceptions to Eleventh Amendment immunity”: “this protection does not apply if (1) a state waives its immunity; (2) Congress clearly abrogates state sovereign immunity; or (3) the suit is against a state

Black v. Bresee's Oneonta Department Store, Inc. Security Plan

919 F. Supp. 597 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 19, 1996

In 1979, DiCresee approached Bre-see’s and proposed to establish for its employees a non-qualified pension plan to be funded through Bresee’s purchase and maintenance of life insurance policies on those employees as sold … While the Court is reluctant to characterize Bresee’s conduct as plain bad faith, clearly Bresee’s conduct reflects a large measure of culpability.

Dawes v. Coughlin

964 F. Supp. 652 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 21, 1997

The defendants deny any unconstitutional conduct, and claim that they are qualifiedly immune from prosecution with respect to the RO’s and DO’s. … daily review of deprivation orders, 1 the availability of the inmate grievance program, 2 and the fact that an inmate has a judicial remedy to challenge deprivation orders, and restraining orders, under CPLR article 78 clearly

Chavous v. M & T Bank

District Court, N.D. New York · May 19, 2025

“In determining whether or not a judge acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction, the judge's jurisdiction is ‘to be construed broadly, and the asserted immunity will only be overcome when the judge clearly lacks jurisdiction … immunity.

Rahm v. Halpin (In Re Halpin)

370 B.R. 45 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 7, 2007

Standard of Review In reviewing a decision from the Bankruptcy Court, this court accepts all factual findings, unless clearly erroneous, but reviews all conclusions of law de novo. … Plaintiff-Appellants claim that HM & E’s unremitted contributions qualify under that statute because Appellee misappropriated the funds, while he was acting in a fiduciary capacity.

Fraccola

District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 19, 2025

Immunity applies because Judicial Defendants clearly acted within the scope of their judicial role, and because Plaintiff fails to allege any specific facts—beyond his personal displeasure with their unfavorable rulings—to … Here, because Plaintiff did not identify a declaratory decree that Judicial Defendants allegedly violated, "nor did he establish that declaratory relief was unavailable[,]" judicial immunity applies, shielding Judicial

Rella v. New York State Office of Mental Health

District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 26, 2020

Based on these facts and the broad coverage of the ADA, Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a qualifying disability. … Defendant contends that “[t]here is nothing in the Complaint establishing that the decision maker, Ms.

Tromblee v. The State of New York

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

But under Thompson, Plaintiff more clearly has standing than the Thompson plaintiff himself. … Individual employees are entitled to “qualified immunity” when “at the time of their actions there was no clear law or precedent warning them that their conduct would violate federal law.” Id. at 254.

Braxton v. Bell

District Court, N.D. New York · Apr 29, 2022

Aug. 25, 2011) (“[E]ven a pro se party’s objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate’s proposal . . . .”). … Defendant’s Objection Defendants do not object to the Magistrate’s findings that Holland and Marion are not entitled to qualified immunity. See generally Defs.’ Obj.

United States v. Ibrahim

998 F. Supp. 2d 12 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 11, 2014

After Sweet ran the information from Ibrahim’s declaration through a Homeland Security database, he was still not satisfied that he had established a true identity. … I waive them freely and voluntarily, without threat or intimidation and without any promise of reward or immunity.

Lewis v. Marshall

612 F. Supp. 2d 185 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 6, 2009

In the absence of a holding of the Supreme Court regarding the issue presented on habeas review, “it cannot be said that the state court unreasonably applied clearly established Federal law.” Carey v. … established federal law.

Hillary v. St. Lawrence County

District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 14, 2020

[the] plot to target Hillary . . . was not pure prosecutorial advocacy,” and that, because Rain began to conspire to target Hillary before probable cause had been established, absolutely immunity is unavailable. (Dkt. … Rain’s alleged conduct clearly falls under the category of conduct protected by prosecutorial immunity. See Baez v.

United States v. Hartery

351 F. Supp. 2d 14 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 6, 2005

“that the appeal is not for the purpose of delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in — (1) reversal .... ” If these two requirements are met, a court may release the defendant “if it is clearly … The Second Circuit has recognized that “[n]either the statute nor case law defines the circumstances which may qualify as exceptional reasons permitting release.” United States v.

Heim v. Daniel

District Court, N.D. New York · May 10, 2022

“[F]or decades it has been clearly established that the First Amendment tolerates neither laws nor other means of coercion, persuasion or intimidation ‘that cast a pall of orthodoxy’ over the free exchange of ideas in the … Destito, 879 F.3d 20, 31 14 Because this claim fails on the merits, it is unnecessary to address qualified immunity.

Burke v. Warren County Sheriff's Department

890 F. Supp. 133 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 30, 1995

Clearly, material issues of fact exist on the issue of Greene’s duty. … Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration clearly is untimely.

Burroughs v. Mitchell

325 F. Supp. 3d 249 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 6, 2018

ANALYSIS Burroughs brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , which establishes a cause of action for " 'the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United … Jan. 22, 2008) (the loss of commissary privileges does not qualify as a serious hardship); see also Williams , 2018 WL 1801201 , at *9 (collecting cases) ("the brief loss of in-cell water privileges certainly does not qualify

Weilburg v. Rodgers

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

“[E]ven a pro se party’s objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate’s proposal . . . .” Machicote v. … And Plaintiff also must 2 To the extent Plaintiff claims that Defendant ADA Rodgers failed to prosecute Defendant Koss for suborning perjury or Richard Castellane for making a false statement, it is well-established that

Winters

District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 19, 2025

So the second factor is also clearly met. … has abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity ....”

Bagner v. United States

428 F. Supp. 2d 101 · District Court, N.D. New York · May 2, 2006

These policies are expressed in the Corps’ Sign Standards Manual (“Manual”), which established standard guidelines for the use of signs that communicated information to the public. … They sued the Corps under the SIAA, and the Corps claimed that the discretionary function exception rendered them immune from liability. Id. at 427 .

McCullough v. Graves

District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 5, 2023

Notably, plaintiff’s complaint does not clearly allege that he was not in possession of the marijuana at the time of the stop. … Indeed, the whole analysis is lousy with tentative qualifiers such as “appears,” “seems,” and “likely.” Of course, adding some measure of solicitude to the mix is par for the course in cases with pro se plaintiffs.