Case law

Plymouth Music Co. v. Magnus Organ Corp.

456 F. Supp. 676 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 11, 1978

In fact, the Court finds that the exact identity of the compositions in the books printed by Plymouth with those printed by Hansen establishes copying by the defendants. … Similarly, Magnus Music is not immune from liability as an innocent infringer for the sale of copies it received from Magnus Organ’s inventory.

Frank v. Plaza Construction Corp.

186 F. Supp. 2d 420 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 21, 2002

To the extent that it is a repetition of a diagnosis given her by a qualified professional, it is hearsay. … “The word ‘substantial’ ... clearly precludes impairments that interfere in only a minor way with the performance of major tasks from qualifying as disabilities.” 68 And here there is no evidence that Frank’s dyslexia substantially

Bruce Realty Company of Florida v. Berger

327 F. Supp. 507 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 28, 1971

But, as Professor Williston observed: “The Statute of Frauds was not enacted to afford persons a means of evading just obligations; nor was it-intended to supply a cloak of immunity to hedging litigants lacking integrity; … The original mortgage clearly defines Twin Reef Acres Limited as the mortgagor and Bruce Realty Company of Florida as the mortgagee.

Graboski v. Guiliani

937 F. Supp. 258 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 4, 1996

The administrative code, on the other hand, speaks to the matter clearly: ‘[W]here the statute speaks with clarity, the statute is the only safe guide through the arcane area of public employees’ pen-[citation omitted] In … short, the collective bargaining agreement created a fund; it did not establish the beneficiaries of that fund.

Tambrands, Inc. v. Warner-Lambert Co.

673 F. Supp. 1190 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 29, 1987

This statement is clearly misleading because the thirty minutes required for negative results makes New E.P.T. … However, “causation must first be established.” Id.

In re Pincus

147 F. 621 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 4, 1906

The Credit Clearing House is a mercantile agency, having for its object, inter alia, the collection of information regarding mercantile establishments for the guidance of its subscribers, who are known as “associate members … To grant this relief without bringing their individual property and individual creditors -into this proceeding is not only without statutory authority, but clearly wrong.

King v. Town of Wallkill

302 F. Supp. 2d 279 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 13, 2004

and therefore is not a “qualified individual with a disability” under either statute. … To be a “qualified individual,” plaintiff bears the burden of proving that he is qualified to perform the essential functions of a police officer in the Town, with or without reasonable accommodation.

Arthur Glick Truck Sales, Inc. v. Stuphen East Corp.

965 F. Supp. 2d 402 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 8, 2013

But the Court clearly adopted each of the controlling, above-cited propositions in granting Defendant’s Summary Judgment Motion. … See In re Havens Steel, 317 B.R. at 84 (explaining that "a party that can establish” either "a common law” or "an Article 2— based” right to recover "may qualify as a [buyer in the ordinary course]”). .

Futia v. Roberts

District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 28, 2023

Acosta, 502 F.3d 54, 60 (2d Cir. 2007). 6 The Federal Defendants also move to dismiss the complaint on several other grounds, including, among others, the availability of qualified immunity. … Plaintiff bears the burden to show Congress waived sovereign immunity with respect to his 7 Plaintiff does not clearly indicate in his complaint whether or not he sues the Federal Defendants in both their individual

Clark v. Astrue

274 F.R.D. 462 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 18, 2011

See id. at 702 , 99 S.Ct. 2545 (“[T]he scope of injunctive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established.”). … The record does not clearly address this point.

Pearson v. Unification Theological Seminary

785 F. Supp. 2d 141 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 24, 2011

This is clearly a legitimate, non-diseriminatory reason for termination. See, e.g., Sista v. CDC Ixis N. … To establish a prima facie case, Pearson must show (1) UTS is subject to the ADA; (2) she was disabled; (3) she was qualified to perform the essential functions of her job, with or without reasonable accommodation; and (4

Stratton v. DEPARTMENT FOR AGING CITY OF NEW YORK

922 F. Supp. 857 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 12, 1996

None of these cases, however, establishes that expert testimony is an absolute prerequisite to the admission of statistical evidence. … Excessive Award A careful review of the record demonstrates that the jury’s award is clearly excessive.

Sigety v. Abrams

492 F. Supp. 1123 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 15, 1980

Wilson clearly delineates the two components of the subpoena process and its constitutional relationship to corporate books and records. … The hearing court expressly refused to grant petitioner immunity.

Corrigan v. United States Fire Insurance

427 F. Supp. 940 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 2, 1977

Clearly, Benjamin was not responsible for the existence of the insurance funds, nor had he acquired any legal rights to them, nor did he have any “choate” security interest that could be transferred to the fund. … The United States argues that since an execution has not been issued to the sheriff, the lien against the fund has not been established.

Huang v. Sentinel Government Securities

709 F. Supp. 1290 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 28, 1989

Vitrella and Allen, former officers of LMI, testified at trial in exchange for grants of immunity from the government. … This Court is bound to follow the clearly established precedent of this circuit.”)

In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Addressed to Sentinel Financial Instruments

553 F. Supp. 71 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 18, 1982

Applying the above criteria, SFI clearly has an established institutional identity separate from its individual partners. … Clearly SFI is not a sole proprietorship nor is it a small family partnership that should be treated like a sole proprietorship for Fifth Amendment purposes.

In Re M/V Rickmers Genoa Litigation

622 F. Supp. 2d 56 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2009

ESM Group established ESMT apparently for the sole purpose of manufacturing SS-89 and its component parts. … Clearly that cannot be the case. Rather, agency theories of liability must be considered on a case-by-case basis and should not be assumed.

Sailor v. Scully

666 F. Supp. 50 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 11, 1987

that since the New York enhanced sentence hearings at issue do not adjudicate facts relating to the defendant’s underlying offense, these hearings cannot be considered an extension of the trial on the merits and hence are immune … Clearly .we have here a dangerous felon; there is a substantial risk that he will pose a danger to the public if released.

Dupree v. Pough

454 F. Supp. 2d 166 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 29, 2006

While the nonmoving party may defeat a motion for summary judgment by establishing that there is a legitimate fact issue for trial, it “must do more than show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts … Because the Court has found that plaintiffs claims against Pough fail, the Court need not address defendant’s arguments regarding her qualified immunity or sovereign immunity. 4 .

Bonano v. Grant

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 11, 2025

The Court has also reviewed actions not specified in the bar orders and has not located other dismissals that qualify as strikes. … As with Plaintiff’s false arrest claim, however, he has pleaded facts establishing that Defendants had probable cause to charge him. See Rothstein v.