Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.32s
District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 6, 2021
Disclosure of Protected Material that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or produced. … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).
Cited 0 timesUnknownNational Broadcasting Co. v. United States Small Business Administration
836 F. Supp. 121 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 28, 1993
Thus, when a proper FOIA request is made, disclosure is required “unless [the] information is exempted under clearly delineated statutory language.” Id. (quoting Department of Air Force v. … (Morse Decl. ¶ 2). 3 Accordingly, the SBA will not be required to produce the requested documents. 4 The SBA also argues that Document 5, a letter from an “Exploration Manager” to Morse, also qualifies as privileged or confidential
Cited 4 timesPublishedTrimm v. New York State Dept. of Corr's and Community Services
District Court, S.D. New York · May 27, 2025
immunity; and (4) the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims. … Moreover, Plaintiff’s Complaint and letters to DOCCS officials are far from clearly establishing that his lack of treatment reached the level of a constitutional violation. See Hathaway v.
Cited 0 timesUnknown498 F. Supp. 2d 673 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 27, 2007
The Court finds that the trial court’s adjudication of this claim was neither “contrary” to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … On this review of the record, the Court concludes that the trial court’s determination of Daniel’s Miranda claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law or based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in
Cited 6 timesPublished526 F. Supp. 1022 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 20, 1981
They urge that the specificity of references contained in all the foregoing establishes that an in camera inspection is not required. … That Exemption requires the government to establish that the withheld matters are: (A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign
Cited 11 timesPublishedCarl Zeiss Stiftung v. VEB Carl Zeiss, Jena
293 F. Supp. 892 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 7, 1968
Furthermore, the authorities offered by Nathan and Honig are unpersuasive and clearly distinguishable. … To that extent the Wuerttemberg Acts and the 1967 Law appear to qualify for recognition as “acts of state”.
Modified on other grounds by Carl Zeiss Stiftung v. VEB Carl Zeiss Jena, 433 F.2d 686 (1970)Cited 57 timesPublished956 F. Supp. 509 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 27, 1997
The failure to establish any of these elements is fatal to a Section 10(b) or Rule 10b-5 claim. See id.; Central Bank of Denver, N.A v. … Accordingly, to pursue a civil RICO claim, a plaintiff must establish a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1962 (the “RICO statute”).
Cited 140 timesPublished406 F. Supp. 968 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 15, 1975
However, the hearing examiner further found that plaintiff had transferable skills and that the evidence was insufficient to establish that plaintiff’s left knee or other impairment rendered him unable to engage in substantial … Clearly, if a judgment were to be made solely with respect to the medical record, the Secretary’s decision may not be overturned for lack of substantial evidence. *973 Despite plaintiff’s many complaints and recurrent visits
Cited 22 timesPublished637 F. Supp. 2d 201 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 28, 2009
The statute has been interpreted to require a petitioner to show not only that clearly established federal law was erroneously or incorrectly applied, but that the application was unreasonable. See Williams v. … Procedural default in state court qualifies as an independent and adequate state ground when “the last state court rendering a judgment in the case clearly and expressly states that its judgment rests on a state procedural
Cited 2 timesPublished944 F. Supp. 266 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 23, 1996
Section 1983 provides a cause of action for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States. … Scott clearly cannot allege a liberty interest arising directly under the Due Process Clause. See Webb, 1996 WL 452260 , at *4; Rivera, 1996 WL 22342 , at *4; Rosario v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedEqual Employment Opportunity Commission v. Mavis Discount Tire, Inc.
129 F. Supp. 3d 90 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 11, 2015
The EEOC alleges that Defendants discriminated against the charging party, Nicole Haywood, and other similarly qualified female applicants during the 2008 to 2012 time period, in favor of hiring less qualified men for positions … Implicitly, perhaps, they argue that they always hire the most qualified applicants, but they have not endeavored, to show in any categorical fashion that the female applicants rejected were less qualified than the males
Cited 8 timesPublished356 F. Supp. 2d 323 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 10, 2005
A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement. … By the same token, however, if such verification is obtained by the employee, we see no reason why the guest card that has been filled in by the guest himself would not qualify as a business record and thus be admissible
Cited 5 timesPublishedHelene Curtis Industries, Inc. v. Sales Affiliates, Inc.
148 F. Supp. 340 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 9, 1957
Under that principle, although the plan or scheme adopted is not specifically enjoined, the defendant has no immunity from civil contempt if the result or consequence produced by it is otherwise prohibited. … Firstly, the law is clearly established that a supplemental injunction will only issue “to make more clear and specific what had already been *348 enjoined.” 17 It may not issue to enlarge the scope of the original injunction
Cited 6 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Mar 14, 2022
In the alternative, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. (See id. at 14–15.) … Moreover, under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a government official is immune from liability “whenever (1) his conduct ‘did not violate clearly established law’, or (2) ‘it was objectively reasonable . . . to believe
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Feb 15, 2022
“[A]s a general rule, state governments may not be sued in federal court unless they have waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity, or unless Congress has abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity when acting pursuant … To that point, it is well-settled that “New York has not waived its sovereign immunity in § 1983 lawsuits, nor has Congress abrogated the State’s immunity.” Phillips v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States v. Certain Lands in Town of Highlands
36 F. Supp. 968 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 21, 1941
The Commissioners qualified, viewed the property, held hearings, and now have filed their report. … An award will not be set aside as excessive or inadequate unless it is obvious and clearly wrong or unless it is such as to shock the sense of justice of the court.
Cited 5 timesPublishedNationsbank of Florida v. Banco Exterior De Espana
867 F. Supp. 167 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 17, 1994
New York clearly has a relation to this defendant and this litigation. … of a foreign state, unless the claimant establishes his claim or right to relief by evidence satisfactory to the Court.” 28 U.S.C. § 1608 (e).
Cited 14 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Nov 6, 2023
Plaintiff asks the Putnam County court to “dismiss the case sua sponte . . . and to provide factual evidence of jurisdiction of the charges to the court over the parties, and want of a qualified witness to … Auth., 722 F.2d 20, 22 (2d Cir. 1983) (noting that “it is established that a corporation, which is an artificial entity that can only act through agents, cannot proceed pro se”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Nov 6, 2023
Plaintiff asks the Putnam County court to “dismiss the case sua sponte . . . and to provide factual evidence of jurisdiction of the charges to the court over the parties, and want of a qualified witness to … Auth., 722 F.2d 20, 22 (2d Cir. 1983) (noting that “it is established that a corporation, which is an artificial entity that can only act through agents, cannot proceed pro se”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownGuan Ming Lin v. Benihana Nat'l Corp.
755 F. Supp. 2d 504 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 15, 2010
Minimum Wage The FLSA establishes a nationwide minimum wage for covered employees; at present, the rate is $7.25 per hour. 29 U.S.C. § 206 . … Lin’s allegations are thus too conclusory to establish the requisite factual nexus with other members of the putative collective action.
Cited 43 timesPublished
Ask Donna