Case law

Lewis v. Wolfe

District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 14, 2021

The sanction requiring Plaintiff to seek leave from the Second Circuit before filing any future appeal in that court was imposed because of her frivolous, vexatious, and “clearly meritless appeals.” … In addition, court clerks “are absolutely immune from suit for ‘functions which are administrative in nature if the task was undertaken pursuant to the explicit direction of a judicial officer or pursuant to the established

In re an Order Compelling Carroll

149 F. Supp. 634 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 2, 1957

The contention that the Internal Revenue-Service is required to permit him to establish his bona fide foreign residence-at the inquiry is without merit. … Other cases cited by the respondent are merely those where the showing made by the Government clearly indicated a lack of relevance or necessity.

Potomac Capital Markets Corp. v. Prudential-Bache Corporate Dividend Fund, Inc.

726 F. Supp. 87 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 4, 1989

The Court finds that the Complaint’s statement that the defendants acted “without any attempt to protect shareholders” sets forth a sufficient allegation to establish a cause of action for “gross negligence.” … If the directors did not in fact have such authority, then the defendants’ argument that the liquidation occurred in the ordinary course of the Fund’s business clearly fails.

City of New York v. Exxon Corp.

766 F. Supp. 177 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 19, 1991

Moreover, when the EPA Administrator’s interpretation of his own regulations is at issue, deference is even more clearly in order. E.g., Vermont v. Thomas, 850 F.2d at 102 ; Soler v. … There is no requirement that a waste qualify under both Subpart C and Subpart D.

In re Rivastigimine Patent Litigation

239 F.R.D. 351 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 22, 2006

Examining the Swiss statutes proffered by Plaintiffs, Magistrate Francis found that none established an absolute privilege comparable to attorney-client privilege. … The proponent of the privilege bears the burden of establishing its applicability to the present circumstances. See P. & B. Marina, Ltd. v.

Johnson-El v. Deprospo

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 3, 2020

Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90, 99 (2d Cir. 2010) (“Collateral estoppel precludes a party from relitigating in a subsequent action or proceeding an issue clearly raised in a prior action or proceeding and decided against that … It is well established that principles of issue preclusion apply to threshold determinations, such as subject-matter jurisdiction, see, e.g., Stone v.

YEDA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD. v. Imclone Systems Inc.

443 F. Supp. 2d 570 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 18, 2006

After Bellot oversaw the immunization of eight mice, four of which were immunized with CH-71 cells and four of which were immunized with CH-71 cell membranes, Bellot performed tests on the sera, ie., the fluid portion of … Lippmann's report simply because he most clearly sets forth in writing the scientific underpinnings of the instant dispute. 11 . As Dr.

State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Inversiones Errazuriz, Limitada

230 F. Supp. 2d 313 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 4, 2002

They offer detailed billing records and e-mails that establish Mr. … However, the doctrine is clearly a discretionary one. See, e.g., Wiwa v.

Doe v. Simmons

District Court, S.D. New York · May 30, 2024

In addition, a producing person may use its own document (e.g., as a deposition exhibit) containing material that is subject to a claim of privilege or immunity from disclosure for the purpose of establishing the basis … claim of privilege or immunity from disclosure for any purpose other than establishing the basis of such claim. 24.

Bank of New York v. Yugoimport SDPR J.P.

780 F. Supp. 2d 344 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 29, 2011

Clearly, the FDSP was an agency of the SFRY. There is nothing unusual about a publicly owned and managed corporation performing state functions. … May 8, 1991, is the date the FDCSPP was established.

Wright v. Jewish Child Care Ass'n

68 F. Supp. 3d 520 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 23, 2014

Under this framework, a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case by showing that: (1) she was within a protected class or age group, respectively; (2) she was qualified for the position; (3) she was subject to an … As such, Wright fails to establish an inference of age bias and thus to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination. B.

Sterling v. 1279 St. Johns Place, LLC (In re Sterling)

565 B.R. 258 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 3, 2017

“[A] finding is ‘clearly erroneous’ when” the reviewing court is “left with the.definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” ASM Capital, LP v. Ames Dep’t Stores, Inc. … Ohio Mar. 1, 2011): *265 [T]he Clearfield Trust Doctrine does not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity. In Clearfield Trust v.

In re Bando

20 F.R.D. 610 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 24, 1957

On the basis of the clearly established facts, it is patent that the claim to the privilege is based upon an imaginary possibility of danger, having no relation to reality. … danger of extending the principle * * * is that the privilege may be put forward for a sentimental reason, or for a purely fanciful protection of the witness against an imaginary danger, and for the real purpose of securing immunity

Byrne v. British Broadcasting Corp.

132 F. Supp. 2d 229 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 22, 2001

To establish a claim of copyright infringement, a plaintiff must establish (1) ownership of a valid copyright and (2) unauthorized copying or a violation of one of the other exclusive rights afforded copyright owners pursuant … However, “non-profit organizations enjoy no special immunity from determinations of copyright violation. The question under factor one is the purpose and character of the use, not of the alleged infringer.” Lish v.

Home Box Office, Inc. v. Directors Guild of America, Inc.

531 F. Supp. 578 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 2, 1982

Union conduct that falls within either exemption is immunized from challenge under the Sherman Act. … the same effect that directly results from the union’s coercion” should also be immune).

Kapoor v. Rosenthal

269 F. Supp. 2d 408 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 27, 2003

Rosenthal’s offer of judgment clearly states that it includes reasonable attorney’s fees. See Def. Br. at 1. Kapoor’s acceptance of Rosenthal’s Rule 68 offer constitutes a final judgment. See Gardner v. … When a party advocates that the lodestar amount be reduced, he or she bears the burden of establishing that a reduction is justified. United States Football League v.

Warner v. Orange County Department of Probation

968 F. Supp. 917 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 27, 1997

In those motions, discussion of plaintiff's actions was confined to defendant's unsuccessful claims of collateral estoppel and judicial immunity. 5 . … However, in the general sense of adopting the belief that there is a supreme being interested in, and overseeing, human behavior, the A.A. approach is clearly religious.

Dangler Ex Rel. Dangler v. Yorktown Central Schools

771 F. Supp. 625 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 14, 1991

. § 1983 , it is necessary that there be a deprivation of a right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution or federal laws. … Before one is entitled to due process, however, the property right must be established.

Dipinto v. Westchester County

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 30, 2019

Further, to the extent Defendants also make a qualified immunity “argument,” (see Defs.’ Mem. 7–8), Defendants merely restate the qualified immunity caselaw without meaningfully applying it to the facts of the case. … The Court therefore declines to consider at this time whether individual Defendants are protected by qualified immunity.

Avagliano v. Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc.

103 F.R.D. 562 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 7, 1984

The record establishes a number of relevant facts. First, Sumitomo maintains no job descrip *569 tions for any of the twenty-one job titles in the company. … Numerosity The proposed class as limited by the Court clearly satisfies the numerosity requirement of Rule 23(a)(1).