Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersnysd

10,000+ results

1.53s

  • MacMillan, Inc. v. Federal Insurance

    764 F. Supp. 38 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 16, 1991

    See Weinheimer v. Hoffman, 97 A.D.2d 314 , 470 N.Y.S.2d 804 (App.Div.1983). A right of contribution will not be implied in actions arising solely from breach of contract. See Board of Educ. v. … Co. v.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled v. Bloomberg

    287 F.R.D. 240 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 7, 2012

    P. 23(b); see also, e.g., Brown v. Kelly, 609 F.3d 467, 475-76 (2d Cir.2010). … Raymond, 220 F.R.D. at 181 (citing Brown v. Giuliani, 158 F.R.D. 251, 269 (E.D.N.Y.1994)).

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • United States v. Adler

    274 F. Supp. 2d 583 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 31, 2003

    Thereafter, a divided panel of our Court of Appeals in United States v. … Handakas was also distinguished by the Court of Appeals in United States v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Carte Blanche (Singapore) PTE., Ltd. v. Diners Club International, Inc.

    758 F. Supp. 908 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 5, 1991

    Diners offices; that CBI had no letterhead of its own between 1983 and 1986; that Flug was identified in certain letters and the telex notice of default to CBS as chairman of Diners; and that CBI did not conduct regular board … As evidence of the alleged misrepresentations of CBI’s financial strength and prospects, plaintiff offers a newsletter distributed by CBI to its franchisees in July 1980, PX 74, 4 and statements made by Steven Brown (“Brown

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Bullard v. Drug Policy Alliance

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

    Soon after the Portugal trip, Brown asked Chavez for all of Bandele’s contracts so that Brown could review them. (Countercl. ¶ 206). After reviewing the contracts, Brown expressed concern about them to McFarland. … On May 16, 2018, McFarland spoke with the Executive Committee of the DPA Board. (Countercl. ¶ 214).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Harrison v. Potter

    323 F. Supp. 2d 593 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 2, 2004

    See, e.g., Brown v. … Briones, 101 F.3d at 289 ; see also Brown, 425 U.S. at 832 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 ; Long v.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Allied Chemical & Dye Corp. v. the Tug Christine Moran

    190 F. Supp. 703 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 23, 1961

    Even though the captain and mate were certified able-bodied seamen, no one on board was skilled in navigation. Had there been navigational equipment aboard the vessel, it could not have been used by the crew. … In Brown v. Cornell Steamboat Co., D.C.S.D.N.Y.1901, 110 F. 780 , a scow in tow by a tug was anchored in the face of unpromising weather during the voyage. The tow was to resume operations the next day.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Lear v. Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.

    District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 7, 2021

    Following the rehearsals, Plaintiff was to fly to Alaska to board the Ship, where he was to perform for a nine-month period. Brown Decl. ¶ 9; Kling Decl. ¶ 11. … (quoting Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011)).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Berman v. National Maritime Union

    166 F. Supp. 327 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 18, 1958

    Radio Officers Union, etc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 1954, 347 U.S. 17 , 74 S.Ct. 323, 337 , 98 L.Ed. 455 . … The discrimination, if any, which is alleged, is completely distinct from that described in §§ 8(a) (3) and 8(b) (2) of the Labor Management Relations Act, and is not cognizable by the Board. See, Syres v.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Ceballos v. Shaughnessy

    130 F. Supp. 30 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 15, 1955

    In De Pinho Vaz v. … Podovinnikoff v. Miller, 3 Cir., 1950, 179 F.2d 937 ; Slavik v. Miller, 3 Cir., 1950, 184 F.2d 575 , certiorari denied, 1951, 340 U.S. 955 , 71 S.Ct. 566 , 95 L.Ed. 688 ; Paolo v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Clark v. Times Square Stores Corp.

    469 F. Supp. 654 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 27, 1979

    Griffith v. Bank of New York, 147 F.2d 899, 904 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 325 U.S. 874 , 65 S.Ct. 1414 , 89 L.Ed. 1992 (1945). 3 . Mitchell v. National Broadcasting Co., 553 F.2d 265, 276 (2d Cir. 1977). 4 . … Al-Hamdani v. State University of New York, 438 F.Supp. 299, 303 (W.D.N.Y.1977). 5 . Cates v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 561 F.2d 1064 , 1067 n. 4 (2d Cir. 1977).

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • In re The Boskenna Bay

    31 F. 612 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 22, 1887

    Brown, J. … A comparison of the libelant’s fruit with other fruit of quite different marks and brands on board the Boskenna Bay, and with other sales of fruit similar to the latter class, assumes that damage to the whole fruit on the

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • LOUIS DREYFUS CORPORATION v. United States

    401 F. Supp. 919 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 6, 1975

    Consolidated Edison Co. v. Labor Board, 305 U.S. 197, 229 , 59 S.Ct. 206, 217 , 83 L.Ed. 126 .. . … Chicago Board of Trade v. Illinois Central RR. Co., 344 I.C.C. 818 (1973), aff’d, Chicago & Eastern Ill. RR. Co. v. United States, 384 F.Supp. 298 (N.D.Ill. 1974).

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Falk v. FFF Industries, Inc.

    731 F. Supp. 134 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 26, 1990

    Bigelow, Inc. v. Unilever N.V., 867 F.2d 102 (2d Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Liyton v. R.C. Bigelow, Inc., — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 64 , 107 L.Ed.2d 31 (1989). … See, e.g., Gerlach v. The Horn & Hardart Co., 683 F.Supp. 342 (S.D.N.Y.1988); Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Ross, 75 A.D.2d 373, 429 N.Y.S.2d 653 (1st Dep’t 1980); Klepner v. Codata Corp., 139 Misc.2d 382 , 527 N.Y.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Beatty v. Snow

    588 F. Supp. 809 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 18, 1984

    Neither Finetti v. Harris, 609 F.2d 594 (2d Cir.1979), nor Brown v. … See Finetti, 609 F.2d at 597 ; Brown, 572 F.2d at 406 . The decision in Daye v. Attorney General of New York, 696 F.2d 186 (2d Cir.1982) (en banc), simply restates the rule of Brown v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad

    759 F. Supp. 1019 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 1990

    Local 553, Transport Workers Union v. Eastern Air Lines, 695 F.2d 668, 675 (2d Cir.1982). The sole purpose of a minor-dispute injunction is to preserve the jurisdiction of the adjustment board. … board could give no “significant remedy” without it).

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • T.E. v. Pine Bush Central School District

    58 F. Supp. 3d 332 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 4, 2014

    Doe v. … Gant v.

    Abrogated on other grounds by Agosto v. New York City Department of Education, 982 F.3d 86 (2020)Cited 21 timesPublished
  • Association of Data Processing Services Organizations, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A.

    508 F. Supp. 91 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 15, 1980

    The Noerr-Pennington doctrine was extended to the adjudicative process in California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508 , 92 S.Ct. 609 , 30 L.Ed.2d 642 (1972). … See Franchise Realty Interstate Corp. v. San Francisco Local Joint Executive Board, 542 F.2d 1076, 1082-83 (9th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 940 , 97 S.Ct. 1571 , 51 L.Ed.2d 787 (1977).

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Endicott v. Renauld

    8 F. Cas. 708 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 15, 1879

    and damage were not caused by perils of the sea” but by the “carelessness, unskillfulness and wrongful acts of the master, officers and seamen of the vessel” and “by defective dunnage, stowage and improper handling and v* … The hogsheads were not damaged. • The vessel had a centre-board, and the damaged bags and boxes were found adjoining to or near the trunk of this centre-board, which rose about nine feet high in the hold.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Gulf & Western Industries, Inc. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

    356 F. Supp. 1066 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 13, 1973

    the Board and of the corporation. … The law of this Circuit is, as enunciated in Hamilton Watch Co. v.

    Cited 33 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.