Case law

M.Q. v. Kenneth Genalo

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

“Importantly, to survive a motion to dismiss for lack of causation, ‘the plaintiff’s pleading need not clearly establish that the defendant harbored retaliatory intent. … This falls into a grey area, between timespans that are clearly short enough or too long.

In Re Gas Reclamation, Inc. Securities Litigation

733 F. Supp. 713 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 1990

If the aider owes a duty of disclosure to the defrauded party, proof of recklessness will suffice to establish scienter. … Clearly, Esrine did not solicit purchases from any of these investors. The investors also cite cases which held that defendants who prepared and disseminated prospectuses qualify as section 12 sellers. See Capri v.

Dobrynio v. Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp.

419 F. Supp. 2d 557 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 9, 2006

DeMaio, consistent with the Company’s established practice. (Pl.Dep.88, 93, 96, 105). These reviews ordinarily were accompanied by raises. … His complaint does not raise these issues (and they are clearly time-barred); therefore, this Court does not consider them.

Recant v. DeSales Assisted Living Corp.

District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 25, 2025

De Sales and Vista are private entities that do not qualify as state actors, and Atanasio and Hill do not work for any state or other government body. … has abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity . . . .”

Morabito v. Blum

528 F. Supp. 252 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 25, 1981

Nowhere in the statute establishing the Medicaid program are states expressly required to establish medical care advisory committees. … Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974), defendant Krauskopf enjoys no such immunity.

Camloc Fastener Corp. v. OPW Corp.

164 F. Supp. 15 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 25, 1958

It does not apply, however, to number 414291 issued in connection with certain specified hand and machine tools, as we think the mark as applied to them is clearly not descriptive. … We note here, also, plaintiff’s failure to establish any instances of actual confusion.

Reynolds v. Pegler

123 F. Supp. 36 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 22, 1954

Tompkins era has been in accord. 3 Even were the matter open for consideration I see no reason to differ from established law. … The article upon its face was clearly defamatory — and extensively so.

Brown v. Coughlin

758 F. Supp. 876 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 8, 1991

In order to establish a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; (2) that this … Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 922-23, n. 23, 24 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 , 3420-21 n. 23, 24, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984) (Court rejected police officers’ claims for qualified immunity based on their reliance on the judgments of judicial officers

Iaria v. Silver Line, Ltd.

56 F. Supp. 42 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 17, 1943

The eyewitnesses clearly establish the manner in which the accident occurred, that there was a defective winch, and the negligent acts of the respondents. Their testimony stands uncontradicted. … Louria, who qualified as an expert in diagnosis, agreed with the eminent text writers referred to by Dr.

Trainor v. Berner

334 F. Supp. 1143 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 27, 1971

Maytag, 339 F.2d 764 (2d Cir. 1964), no cause of action is established under § 10(b). … Curtiss is a Delaware corporation, and the governing Delaware decisions hold that “stockholder ratification of corporate action which is not per se void renders such action immune from minority stockholder attack,” Lewis

Butler Aviation International, Inc. v. Comprehensive Designers, Inc.

307 F. Supp. 910 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 24, 1969

The misrepresentations with regard to earnings were clearly misrepresentations of material facts. … It is also clear to this court that plaintiff has established a great likelihood of success in establishing a violation of Section 14(e) 14 by the defendant CDI.

Clavin v. County of Orange

38 F. Supp. 3d 391 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 4, 2014

and issue Master Electrician’s Licenses to qualified applicants. … Second, both laws provide for the Orange County Electrical Licensing Board to review qualifications and issue licenses to qualified applicants.

Solid 21, Inc. v. Richemont North America, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 8, 2020

The immunity provision does not bar all of the allegations against Richemont NA. The TAC alleges that Richemont NA used the “RED GOLD®” mark outside the immunity period. … Porter (Exhibits 20 and 21) and Sidney Thomas (Exhibit 22) use the term “Red Gold” in a manner that is clearly descriptive and not as a mark.

Lehey v. Northwell Health, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 19, 2024

There is no dispute for purposes of this Motion that Plaintiff’s atrial fibrillation is a qualifying disability under the ADA and NYSHRL. (Compl. ¶ 32; Def. Br. at 11, n. 6). … shall be inapplicable only until such immunization is found no longer to be detrimental to such personnel member’s health.

Slue v. New York University Medical Center

409 F. Supp. 2d 349 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 3, 2006

Second, defendants counter that even if the other elements of a slander claim are established, the alleged defamatory communications were all protected by a qualified privilege. (D.Mem.20.) … Defendants do not make this argument, however, and the factual premise is not clearly established on the present record. Accordingly, the Court does not pass on any such claim of privilege. 16 .

Bergnes v. New York State Unified Court System/Office of Court Administration

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

Under well-established principles of state sovereign immunity, a federal court may not hear a suit brought by any person against a state absent a valid congressional abrogation of immunity or the state’s consent. … Notwithstanding these well-established principles of state sovereign immunity, Plaintiffs argue in their May 26th supplemental letter that this suit is not barred by the Eleventh Amendment.

Plastistarch International Corp. v. Plastistarch Corp.

484 F. Supp. 1312 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 26, 1980

Moreover, since Delaware is not qualified to do business in New York and was not doing business in New York, it consequently could not claim residence in New York on the basis of doing business. … The facts, as detailed above, clearly establish that no negotiation either preliminary or substantial took place here. Plaintiff’s reliance on Liquid Carriers Corp. v.

United States v. Morciglio

280 F. Supp. 3d 412 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 16, 2017

On the other hand, Morciglio was 22 whén he solicited a 14 year old, making him clearly subject to SORNA’s strictures under a fact-based approach, The parties do not dispute that the approach applied necessarily determines … Since the former is not a SORNA-qualifying offense, the latter one is not either.

Sokolowski v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

849 F. Supp. 2d 412 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 28, 2012

Accordingly, any employee who qualifies under the SAVE Agreement must be mailed a waiver letter within 24 hours of removal from service. (Compl. ¶¶ 15-16.) … Clearly the Board viewed the plaintiffs multiple violations as *418 egregious and based on those multiple violations found that he lacked a right to a SAVE waiver.

Hird/Blaker Corp. v. Sava

712 F. Supp. 1095 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 9, 1989

. § 1101 (a)(15)(H)(i), thereby qualifying Lim for a nonimmigrant H-l visa under section 214(c) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1184 (c). … Blaker’s letter are accurate and represent a level of functioning clearly requiring an engineering education.”