Case law

Grytsyk v. Morales

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 22, 2021

Significantly, however, “in the Rule 12(b)(6) context, the facts supporting the defense of qualified immunity must appear on the face of the complaint; even then, a motion to dismiss may be granted on qualified immunity … And it certainly cannot say that “the facts supporting the defense of qualified immunity . . . appear on the face of the complaint.” Sz/livan, 2015 WL 5025296, at *8. 2.

Barr v. Weise

293 F. Supp. 7 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 26, 1968

Lenfest, supra, clearly stated that “a validly promulgated regulation binds the government as much as the individuals subject to the regulation.” … In order to qualify as a minister, students must pass oral and written examinations.

Bell v. New York

506 F. Supp. 590 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 28, 1981

interpreting the terms “substantial federal question”/“substantial constitutional claim”, states that the question or claim presented is not substantial for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction if ‘its unsoundness so clearly … Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds: (1) that the State of New York is immune from suit; (2) that plaintiff has no standing; and (3) that the Younger doctrine of abstention (Younger v.

Naphtali v. Reilly

777 F. Supp. 1193 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 29, 1991

Naphtali inquired about openings for permanent positions in other divisions in Region II for which he believed himself to be qualified. … The evidence at trial clearly established that Naphtali was fully aware of the temporary nature of his appointment.

Allan v. City of New York

386 F. Supp. 2d 542 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 12, 2005

For these reasons, Allan has failed to state or establish a claim for municipal liability against the City. … occurrence and extent of the injuries or damages for which claim is made, which examination shall be upon oral questions unless the parties otherwise stipulate and may include a physical examination of the claimant by a duly qualified

C.A.U.T.I.O.N., Ltd. v. City of New York

898 F. Supp. 1065 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 15, 1995

Defendants next argue that the complaint must satisfy a more stringent standard in order to state a claim against the former officials sued in their individual capacities, who might assert a qualified immunity defense. … However, the issue has been left open by the Supreme Court, see Leatherman, 507 U.S. at -, 113 S.Ct. at 1162 , and the theory that the complaint must plead facts sufficient to disprove qualified immunity has been rejected

Aspilaire v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

612 F. Supp. 2d 289 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 30, 2009

A plaintiff sets forth a prima facie case by establishing that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she is qualified for the position that she held or sought; (3) she suffered an adverse employment action; and ( … As set forth above, the legal standard for a disparate treatment claim requires plaintiff to first set forth a prima facie case establishing that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she is qualified for the position

Catalanello v. Kramer

18 F. Supp. 3d 504 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 7, 2014

And, as noted, at the very outset of the article, Kramer stated clearly that the Pacifico facts were drawn from the allegations of a complaint in an ongoing case, and were not facts found by a court or jury. … “Statements of opinion, as a matter of constitutional law, enjoy absolute immunity.” DeAngelis, 180 N.J. at 14 , 847 A.2d 1261 (quoting Dairy Stores Inc. v. Sentinel Pub.

Spinelli v. National Football League

96 F. Supp. 3d 81 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 2015

Here, the AP Contributor Agreements’ meaning may be clearly gleaned from their text. . … The assignee then claimed that he was immune from the second co-owner’s infringement suit.

Reid v. The City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 7, 2021

City of New York, 727 F.3d 167, 172 (2d Cir. 2013) (stating that prosecutors engaged in administrative or investigatory functions receive qualified, rather than absolute, immunity). … Following the effectuation of service, the Court will await either the DANY Defendants’ Answer or pre-motion letter informing the Court of their intent to adhere to the pre-trial motion schedule that the Court will establish

Love v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

529 F. Supp. 832 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 17, 1981

If he wishes to sue the state directly, he must utilize the statutory procedure established. … The plaintiff has clearly alleged that these areas were dredged.

Peralta v. City Of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 18, 2019

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … Simonetti, 202 F.3d 625, 634 (2d Cir. 2000) (characterizing qualified immunity as “arguable” probable cause).

United States v. Muyet

958 F. Supp. 136 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 29, 1997

Matias’s plea allocution clearly contains statements against his penal interest. He pleaded guilty to two counts of committing a violent act in aid of racketeering. … The statements that tend to establish the elements of this offense qualify as statements against Matias’s penal interest.

Martin v. MTA Bridges & Tunnels

610 F. Supp. 2d 238 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 3, 2009

The uncontested evidence shows that Urstadt and Torresi were qualified for them positions. … Plaintiff clearly believes that she was qualified for the title of “Manager” in 2004 and that her job responsibilities were greater than those of Urstadt or Torresi, but there is nothing in the evidence to suggest that racial

Branigan v. Alex. Brown & Sons, Inc.

978 F. Supp. 547 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 13, 1997

manifest disregard of law, one must show “more than error or misunderstanding with respect to the law.” 2 Instead, “[t]he error must have been obvious and capable of being readily and instantly perceived by the average person qualified … If it did so, the legal principle upon which Branigan relies simply would be inapplicable and the panel quite clearly would not manifestly have disregarded controlling law.

Marshall v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 21, 2020

Qualified Immunity “Under federal law, a police officer is entitled to qualified immunity where (1) his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Even if an officer did not have probable cause to arrest, “an arresting officer will still be entitled to qualified immunity from a suit for damages if he can establish that there was ‘arguable probable cause’ to arrest

Wheeler v. Artola

District Court, S.D. New York · May 8, 2023

immunity on Wheeler’s claim under 42 U.S.C … With regard to the strip search claim, Magistrate Judge Smith concluded that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the reasonable suspicion required for an officer to conduct a strip or visual cavity search

Highland Capital Management, L.P. v. Schneider

551 F. Supp. 2d 173 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 31, 2008

Purcell The Schneiders have met their burden of showing that Purcell is qualified to testify. … Further, as discussed above, Purcell is clearly qualified to testify in this action.

Vazquez v. Marciano

169 F. Supp. 2d 248 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 15, 2001

He is entitled to qualified immunity for making it. Finally, plaintiff contends that Marciano violated his civil rights by taking blood from plaintiff without his consent. … The State is ultimately not hable for determinations that “turn on medical judgments made by private parties according to professional standards that are not established by the State.” Blum v.

Veloz v. New York

339 F. Supp. 2d 505 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2004

immunity; and (6) this Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under the Eleventh Amendment. 2 For the reasons set forth, the motion is granted. … As plaintiff must be qualified for the program from which he claims he was excluded, he fails to establish a violation of the first prong of the Title II ADA test.