Case law

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Joint Apprenticeship Committee of the Joint Board of Electrical Industry

828 F. Supp. 264 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 31, 1993

Sobel v. Yeshiva University (2nd Cir.1988) 839 F.2d 18, 34 . … See 490 U.S. at 657-58 , 109 S.Ct. at 2124-25 ; see also Nash v.

Lewis v. Oppenheimer & Co.

481 F. Supp. 1199 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 21, 1979

Richland v. Crandall, 262 F.Supp. 538, 554 (S.D.N.Y. 1967). The profit fund formula may háve been complicated, but it was not deceptive or misleading. B. Wayne E. Brown’s tax basis Wayne E. … Plaintiff, however, argues that S.E.C. v.

Halebian v. Berv

631 F. Supp. 2d 284 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 31, 2007

Jackson v. … Since plaintiff has not pled facts to suggest that a majority of the board was not independent in the present controversy, the rule in Harhen v.

Gilliam v. Quinlan

608 F. Supp. 823 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 25, 1985

(Brown Affidavit, ¶ 7 & Exhs. E & F.) 2 F. … See, e.g., Slavin v. Curry, 574 F.2d 1256, 1267 (5th Cir. 1978); Landrum v. Moats, 576 F.2d 1320, 1329 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 912 , 99 S.Ct. 282 , 58 L.Ed.2d 258 (1978); Brown v.

Menechino v. Oswald

311 F. Supp. 319 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 6, 1970

Field, cert. denied, 396 U.S. 930 , 90 S.Ct. 259 , 24 L.Ed.2d 228 (1969); Schawartzberg v. United States Board of Parole, 399 F.2d 297 (10th Cir. 1968); Lewis v. Rockefeller, 305 F.Supp. 258 (S.D.N.Y.1969); Briguglio v. … New York State Board of Parole, supra. But see Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128 , 88 S.Ct. 254 , 19 L.Ed.2d 336 (1967); In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1966), 87 S.Ct. 1428 , 18 L.Ed.2d 527 ; United States ex rel. Schuster v.

National Steam-Ship Co. v. The W. A. Morrell

27 F. 570 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 17, 1886

Brown, J. In March, 1886, the steam-ship Queen, of the libelant’s line, arrived in this port-with 7,775 packages of iron wire, belonging to the American Screw Company of Providence. … The whole cargo delivered on board the Morrell has, however, been delivered to the true owners.

Wise v. Kelly

620 F. Supp. 2d 435 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 21, 2008

Defendants cite two cases for their argument that a hefty across-the-board reduction is warranted. In Matthews v. City of New York, No. 01 Civ. 2739(CPS), 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334 (S.D.N.Y. … See Brown, 2007 WL 1573957 . Unless otherwise noted, the background facts set forth herein are drawn from that Opinion. Additional background information can be found at Brown v. Kelly, 244 F.R.D. 222 (2007). 2 .

Atkins v. County of Orange

251 F. Supp. 2d 1225 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 14, 2003

Brown & Co., 947 F.2d 595, 600 (2d Cir.1991) (“... federal pleading is by statement of claim, not by legal theory.”); Gins v. … v.

Stewart v. The Fulda

31 F. 351 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 23, 1887

Brown, J. On the fourth of December, 1886, after dark, between 7 and 8 i\ m., as the steam-tug D. … Heissenbuttel v. Mayor, etc., 30 Fed. Rep. 456.

Brunson v. Duffy

14 F. Supp. 3d 287 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2014

See People v. … .”); Burke v.

Switkes v. Laird

316 F. Supp. 358 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 2, 1970

There was an appeal but the State Appeal Board affirmed the denial by the Local Board of the claim to be a conscientious objector. … See Fox v. Brown, 402 F.2d 837, 840 (2d Cir. 1968), cert, denied, 394 U.S. 938 , 89 S.Ct. 1219 , 22 L.Ed.2d 471 (1969). Counts IV and V These two counts may be considered together.

Cohen v. Bloch

507 F. Supp. 321 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 1, 1980

The actions, including the second cause of action added to the instant complaint, concern related activities of the Board. In Sweet v. … Fischer v. International Tel. & Tel. Co., supra, at 173; Clark v. Cameron-Brown Co., 72 F.R.D. 48, 56-57 (M.D.N.C.1976); Byrnes v. IDS Realty Trust, 70 F.R.D. 608 (D.Minn.1976); Ash v.

Mayor of New York v. The Express

48 F. 323 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 9, 1891

Brown, J. … No lead was thrown by the Express, and no one was at the time of collision on board the Edson, nor were any signals given from her. The Express -was sounding her fog-whistle, as required by law, at short intervals.

Seitz ex rel. Pension Plan of the Brewery Workers Pension Fund v. Board of Trustees

953 F. Supp. 100 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 12, 1997

However, in a widely followed case, Varsic v. United States Dist. … Nat’l Pension Fund v. Wakefield Indus., 699 F.2d 1254 , 1257 (D.C.Cir.1983); Launer v. Buena Vista Winery, Inc., 916 F.Supp. 204, 212 (E.D.N.Y.1996); Economu v. Borg Warner Corp., No. H-84-1320, 1985 WL 4575 (D.Conn.

United States v. Branigan

299 F. Supp. 225 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 11, 1969

Indeed, the four dissenters in Everson v. Board of Education, speaking through Mr. … See Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. 144, 168-169 , 83 S.Ct. 554 , 9 L.Ed. 2d 644 (1963) ; cf. United States v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 458 , 85 S.Ct. 1707 , 14 L.Ed.2d. 484 (1965). . United States v.

Qureshi v. St. Barnabas Hospital Center

430 F. Supp. 2d 279 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 8, 2006

See, e.g., Brown, 605 N.Y.S.2d at 578 (finding that members of non-profit board would assume executive director and personnel committee chair had undisclosed factual basis for their opinions). … Anas v. Brown, 269 A.D.2d 761 , 702 N.Y.S.2d 732, 734 (App. Div. 4th Dep’t 2000) (citing Garson, 532 N.Y.S.2d at 780 ).

Line Communications Corp. v. Reppert

265 F. Supp. 2d 353 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 3, 2003

Octet interests retained a narrow majority of the Board of Directors. … Brown v. Gilmore, 533 U.S. 1301, 1303 , 122 S.Ct. 1 , 150 L.Ed.2d 782 (2001); Turner Broad. Sys. Inc. v. Fed. Communications Comm’n, 507 U.S. 1301 , 1303, 113 S.Ct. 1806 , 123 L.Ed.2d 642 (U.S.1993); Rosemont Enterp. v.

Gray v. Freights of the Kate

63 F. 707 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 16, 1894

Brown v. Gray, 70 Hun, 261 , 24 N. Y. Supp. 61 . 1. … Huntington in his testimony expressed it, and be similar to that of Brown Bros. & Co. For reasons stated in the cases of Brown v.

Oil Transfer Corp. v. Westchester Ferry Corp.

173 F. Supp. 637 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 6, 1958

The flotilla was originally under the ■direction of the “Matton”; but before it reached the Washington Bridge Brown, the master of the “Matton”, boarded the “Oil Tug”, leaving a deckhand or mate on the “Matton”, which continued … In Sturgis v.

Sleeper v. Puig

22 F. Cas. 318 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 15, 1878

Brown v. Johnson, 10 Mees. & W. 331. … I think upon the whole the case is within the rule laid down in Brown v.