Case law

Angus Partners LLC v. Walder

52 F. Supp. 3d 546 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 16, 2014

Clause, and to the Privileges [or] Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” … First, Plaintiffs have failed to establish that the challenged programs even received TBTA surpluses.

Piazza v. Florida Union Free School District

777 F. Supp. 2d 669 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 7, 2011

Plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing that the futility exception applies. See J.S., 386 F.3d at 112 . … Therefore, Plaintiffs must establish that an exception to the exhaustion requirement applies. i.

Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers Union v. J. P. Stevens & Co.

475 F. Supp. 328 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 11, 1979

A fourth 1978 proposal asked the Board to establish a review committee to advise on management-employee relations. Each of these proposals was overwhelmingly defeated. … There are clearly instances of illegal conduct by director-nominees, unrelated to self-dealing, which would have to be disclosed, especially where they involved criminal convictions.

Pryor v. USX Corp.

806 F. Supp. 460 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 12, 1992

If this interpretation were correct, defendant would clearly be mistaken in asserting that it was sufficient for condition (ii) to be met on or before the proration date. … Plaintiffs are mistaken, as a matter of law, when they assert that it is defendant's burden to establish that these shares were timely delivered.

James v. New York City Housing Authority

622 F. Supp. 1356 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 15, 1985

FACTS In order to qualify for public housing, applicants must satisfy a variety of stringent eligibility standards. … Statutory Issues (1) The United States Housing Act Establishes a National Housing Policy The United States Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1437 et seq., establishes a program of financial aid from the federal government to state

Winter v. American Institute of Medical Sciences & Education

242 F. Supp. 3d 206 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 17, 2017

On this point, the moving party must “‘clearly specify the key witnesses to be called and must make a general statement of what their testimony will cover.” … While the parties have different domiciles, the bulk of the factors clearly favor New Jersey as the “center of gravity.” Therefore, the Court will apply New Jersey law. b.

Chevron Corp. v. Salazar

807 F. Supp. 2d 189 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 31, 2011

to join indispensable parties, specifically Ecuador and Petroecuador, whose presence was held to be necessary to effectuate the extensive equitable relief requested, but impossible to obtain in light of their sovereign immunity … It is well to focus also on the fact that public records establish that Texaco did not merge with or into Chevron.

Tron v. Condello

427 F. Supp. 1175 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 23, 1976

This clearly is not a statute of state-wide application within the contemplation of 28 U.S.C. § 2281 . IY. … . § 1343 (3), 7 clearly cannot be maintained because a municipality is not a “person” within the meaning of Section 1983. City of Kenosha v.

In Re a Grand Jury Subpoena Served Upon Kinoy

326 F. Supp. 400 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 28, 1970

to elicit from this witness narrow and j clearly defined information, relating to! … He has “failed to meet the burden of establishing the essential predicate to invocation of the privilege,” In re Bonanno, supra, 344 F.2d at 831 .

Artrip v. Bowen

651 F. Supp. 376 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 13, 1987

his previous work in a manufacturing plant, work which required significant climbing, lifting and bending [AR 23-25], the AU concluded that this impairment was not so severe that it constituted a “listed impairment” thus qualifying … Clearly, it is not improper for an AU to question the credibility of a claimant’s statements of disabling pain, or to refuse to take them at face value.

United States v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

52 F.2d 148 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 5, 1931

It is too well established to require discussion that a disclosed principal can sue on an ordinary contract made by its agent in *149 tho name of the principal. See 2 Mechem on Agency (2d Ed.) p. 1623. … The express^ statutory provision as to administrators is clearly the controlling reason for the decision in that case.

Chambers & Barber, Inc. v. General Adjustment Bureau, Inc.

60 F.R.D. 455 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 30, 1973

The complaint, reading both paragraphs together, states quite clearly that the plaintiff and members of the class had no knowledge of the illegal acts or of any of the facts which might have led to the discovery thereof until … Paragraph 20 adequately sets forth activities which from their general nature may be presumed to be secret and which could qualify as means of concealment. 5 These allegations are that the defendant and co-conspirators have

Campbell v. Alliance National Inc.

107 F. Supp. 2d 234 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 6, 2000

Alliance argues that plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case for two reasons: (1) she was not qualified for the position as evidenced by her multiple probations; and (2) the circumstances of her termination do … While plaintiff has failed to establish that she was qualified for her position, based on the overwhelming and uncontradicted proof of *244 plaintiffs incompetence as an Operations Manager, 5 I will nonetheless turn to the

Cherny v. Emigrant Bank

604 F. Supp. 2d 605 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 12, 2009

Co., 152 F.3d 162, 168 (2d Cir.1998) (identifying damages as an element for establishing breach of contract claim). … Bureau of Indian Affairs, 493 F.Supp.2d 91, 108 (D.Me.2007) (disclosure of personal email addresses is a "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”); ASIS Internet Servs. v. Active Response Group, No.

Branch v. State University of New York Downstate Medical Center

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 20, 2020

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under McDonnell Douglas, “a plaintiff must show that (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the position he held; (3) he suffered an adverse … Fanous in his official capacity are barred by sovereign immunity. “[T]he City of New York does not have the power to waive the State’s sovereign immunity.” Jattan v.

Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Levitt

461 F. Supp. 1123 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 11, 1978

No payment to a qualifying school shall be made until the commissioner has approved the application submitted pursuant to section four of this act. § 7. Audit. … This record shall clearly indicate the amount of time devoted to each service. (3) An individual salary record for each employee involved in providing services for which apportionment is requested.

Munoz v. Keane

777 F. Supp. 282 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 4, 1991

[I]f he be an attorney for the people, he must be qualified to represent his client at law. [Id. at 281-82.] Despite the broad language quoted above, Munson is not analogous to this case. … Petitioners have also requested leave to take discovery to establish facts that would demonstrate they were prejudiced by Penofsky’s conduct.

American Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Defense

229 F. Supp. 3d 193 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 18, 2017

Cir. 2012) (holding that statute beginning with the phrase “notwithstanding any other provision of law” “readily qualifies as an Exemption 3 statute.”); O’Keefe v. U.S. … He may delegate the work to his staff, but he must establish the criteria to be utilized in categorizing the photographs and assessing the likely harm upon release.

Billings v. State Of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 19, 2022

Compl. ¶¶ 140–53.) 7 Defendants also argue that each of the individual Defendants have qualified immunity. (Defs.’ Br. at 19.) … Because the Court dismisses Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claim on the grounds discussed, the Court will not reach the parties’ qualified immunity arguments.

UrthTech LLC v. Gojo Industries, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York · May 21, 2024

relevant privilege or immunity. … , or any other immunity, or (ii) any applicable privilege or immunity has been waived other than by the inadvertent production of such material. 6.