Case law

Saritejdiam, Inc. v. Excess Insurance

778 F. Supp. 148 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 29, 1991

In addition, the court’s own research suggested that “care” is an indefinitely defined term, that “custody” can be constructive and that “control” can be qualified. Id. at 520-21 , 454 N.Y.S.2d at 406-07 . … For example, in the Hotel/Motel Clause, which follows the Personal Conveyance Clause, the requirements for coverage at night are clearly listed.

Giddings v. Oanda Corp.

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 12, 2023

Plaintiff does not plead, nor is there evidence to suggest, that the state of Maryland waived immunity, Congress abrogated its immunity, or that Plaintiff seeks prospective injunctive relief. … Additionally, although Plaintiff argues that he has a “clearly established right to receive protection from the government,” (Doc. 72 at 5), “[i]t is well established that there is no constitutional right to an investigation

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank v. Morgan Stanley & Co.

651 F. Supp. 2d 155 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 2, 2009

The Rating Agencies The Rating Agencies argue that plaintiffs have not pled an actionable misrepresentation because (1) the Rating Agencies are entitled to immunity under the First Amendment and (2) even if the Rating Agencies … Both of these allegations establish that Morgan Stanley was well positioned to cause the false and misleading ratings to be disseminated to investors, thereby establishing Morgan Stanley’s opportunity to commit the alleged

John Gil Construction, Inc. v. Riverso

72 F. Supp. 2d 242 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 23, 1999

In determining whether a prospective bidder qualifies for inclusion on a list of pre-qualified bidders, the authority shall consider (1) the experience and past performance of the prospective bidder; (2) the prospective bidder … For example, “[i]n determining whether a prospective bidder qualifies for inclusion on a list of pre-qualified bidders .... [t]he authority may also consider such other factors as it deems appropriate.”

Peterson

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2026

immunity to a foreign sovereign’s extraterritorial assets.” … Markazi’s claimed interest is clearly non-frivolous.

Meckel v. Continental Resources Co.

586 F. Supp. 407 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 16, 1984

which Citibank asserts was mailed on July 16, 1979, provided that the debentures had to be converted into Florida Gas common stock by August 20, 1979 or the debentures would be considered redeemed at their face value as established … Citibank’s duty to provide notice is clearly set out in the indenture.

Citizens and Southern Securities Corp. v. Braten

733 F. Supp. 655 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 16, 1990

These recordings clearly reveal that on October 15, 1987 Braten was informed by Ms. Gibbes that there was a margin maintenance call of $142,054. … See Manufacturers Hanover, 801 F.2d at 23 (violation of an established statutory or regulatory cognate may be proof of recklessness).

Beneficial Corp. v. Beneficial Capital Corp.

529 F. Supp. 445 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 7, 1982

All of the evidence introduced as to the sophistication of the customers of defendant supports this conclusion. 5 Three of defendant’s customers testified at trial, and they clearly qualified as “sophisticated purchasers” … New York’s Anti-Dilution Statute [14] Plaintiffs have failed to establish a right to relief under New York’s anti-dilution statute, N.Y.

In Re Omnicom Group, Inc. Securities Litigation

541 F. Supp. 2d 546 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 29, 2008

The burden of establishing loss causation rests on the plaintiff. 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(4). … First, where a disclosure does not reveal the falsity of the alleged misstatements, it does not qualify as “corrective.”

Juarez v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance

69 F. Supp. 3d 364 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 14, 2014

.”)-, 11/3/14 Tr. 6 at 11 (“[The policy] clearly couldn’t be driven by a motive, an intent, purposeful discrimination against someone because of their lack of citizenship, or they would have excluded all of them.”).) … Contractors, 458 U.S. at 389-90 , 102 S.Ct. 3141 , these cases suggest that Juarez’s allegations, if proven, would establish a violation of § 1981.

Solow v. Stone

994 F. Supp. 173 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 29, 1998

Nevertheless, because standing is a jurisdictional matter, the burden is on the plaintiff “clearly .to allege facts demonstrating that he is a proper party to invoke judicial resolution of the dispute.” … See Murtha, 45 N.Y.2d at 915 , 411 N.Y.S.2d at 220 , 383 N.E.2d 865 (setting forth limited exception to general immunity of directors and officers).

United States v. Scala

432 F. Supp. 2d 395 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 2, 2006

Barket received fees during the time at issue in the indictment would not necessarily establish that the fees paid were taxable income for any of the years in question. … While an accused has a constitutional right to counsel of his choice, the right to insist upon a specific attorney is qualified. 19 It may well be that Scala’s right to insist upon Mr.

Firemen's Ins. Co. of Newark, NJ v. Keating

753 F. Supp. 1137 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 13, 1990

Rather, plaintiff argues that § 1692i as a whole is clearly inapplicable to the instant actions, because the law firm of Hart & Hume cannot be deemed to be a “debt collector,” as that term is defined by the FDCPA. … motion, as a defense or otherwise in any such suit, action or proceeding, any claims that the Principal is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of the above-named courts or that the Principal's property is exempt or immune

Dixon v. Reid

District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 23, 2024

In addition, a Producing Party 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. 25.

Kesselman v. THE RAWLINGS CO., LLC

668 F. Supp. 2d 604 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 13, 2009

Jean-Pierre does not allege in the Amended Complaint that corresponding with Rawlings constituted administrative remedies as provided for under the plan, or that she understood them to qualify as such. … The Fifth Circuit then remanded, noting that “[Resolution of the ‘debt collector issue in this case is clearly tied to a determination of the circumstances surrounding the inception of the debt.

In re Petrobras Securities Litigation

169 F. Supp. 3d 547 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 12, 2016

PwC also moves to dismiss all claims brought by plaintiff the Board of Regents of the University of Texas (the “Board”) for lack of standing. 4 To establish standing, a plaintiff must demonstrate an injury-in-fact. … Rui. 84-25-064 (March 20, 1984) (concluding that “the University System and its component institutions” qualify for state exemptions from federal excise taxes).

Williams v. New York State

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 26, 2025

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. … Accordingly, Plaintiff’s ninth claim for relief is dismissed.7 7 Given the Court’s rulings herein, the Court need not and does not address the Defendants’ qualified immunity argument about Plaintiff’s ninth claim

United States v. Simmon

153 F. Supp. 3d 617 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 28, 2015

(Id. at 35) In sum, Kromah’s testimony [at trial] very clearly sets forth that Defendant explicitly threatened him with harm if Kromah refused to drive the Defendant to the second location. … Div. 1st Dep’t 1993) (shoving sufficient to establish *628 force); People v. Safon, 166 A.D.2d 892 , 560 N.Y.S.2d 552, 552 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep’t 1990) (evidence sufficient to establish the use of force); People v.

Bowman v. New York State Housing and Community Renewal (NYS HCR)

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 13, 2020

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, Section 1981, and the ADEA, a plaintiff “must show: (1) he belonged to a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the position he held; (3) he suffered … Bowman establishes but-for cause by pleading that the transfer took place one day after the EEOC complaint. �is is sufficiently close in time to establish causation.

Torrico v. International Business MacHines Corp.

319 F. Supp. 2d 390 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 9, 2004

The meaning of “resident” under the NYHRL need not be revisited because the evidence developed in discovery establishes that Torrico does not qualify as either a resident or a domiciliary of New York. … The ADA To make out a prima facie case under the ADA, Torrico must establish (1) that IBM is subject to the ADA; (2) that he suffers from a disability within the meaning of the ADA; (3) that, he is otherwise qualified to