Case law

Stern v. Regency Towers, LLC

886 F. Supp. 2d 317 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 10, 2012

May 16, 2008) (holding that allegations that a judge backdated arrest and search warrants were barred by judge’s judicial immunity). … In other words, even assuming there was fraud, Stern cannot establish that it was the “direct and proximate cause” of his eviction, so his claim fails. Laub v.

In re September 11 Litigation

262 F.R.D. 274 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 30, 2009

The crucial requirement, good cause, exists “when a party shows that disclosure will result in a clearly defined, specific and serious injury.” … However, such a record will be established at a public trial of those claims, if there is a trial, and if such information is relevant.

Prime Mover Capital Partners L.P. v. Elixir Gaming Technologies, Inc.

793 F. Supp. 2d 651 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 22, 2011

Id. " 'Participation Agreement' means ... a written lease agreement between [EGT] and a Qualified Lessee, pursuant to which the Company leases an EGM to the Qualified Lessee, for a minimum period of three years, and the Qualified … Aug.3, 2010) (applying forum law where "[plaintiff's allegations ... do not clearly establish the “center of gravity” of the parties’ *674 contract”); Bravado Intern. Group Merchandising Services, Inc. v.

Lawtone-Bowles v. The City of New York (NYC)

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 12, 2021

Court must dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint, or any portion of the complaint, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … It is unclear whether, on appeal, be able to establish her eligibility for the parking permit program.

Harris Trust & Savings Bank v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

722 F. Supp. 998 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 1989

The saving clause then qualifies ERISA’s preemptive effect. … The trust just as clearly relates to an employee benefit plan, however, and it clearly comes under ERISA’s purview as well.

Noble v. 93 University Place Corp.

224 F.R.D. 330 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 3, 2004

Defendants argued that because of his managerial responsibilities and salary, Noble qualified as an executive. … But section 216 only grants qualifying individuals the right to opt into the FLSA collective action.

Osberg v. Foot Locker, Inc.

138 F. Supp. 3d 517 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 5, 2015

He was clearly annoyed at having to be present' at the trial and was short tempered and’ resistant. … —“and helped to establish that the plaintiffs did not know the truth about their retirement benefits.”

United States v. Badalamenti

614 F. Supp. 194 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 23, 1985

Absent some supporting indication in the legislative history, I think it most doubtful that Congress can have intended by its broad language to cover a special application so clearly at odds with an accused defendant’s constitutionally … Fisher asserts his right under the Fifth Amendment to refuse to respond to the subpoena and demands that immunity be conferred on him under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 .

The Mary Ann

16 F. Cas. 949 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 15, 1848

They no doubt thought they were acting for the best interests of the owner, and in maintenance of the laws of their country; but most clearly these matters were not within their competency to determine, and in a civil action … Independent of that consideration, it seems to me that the owner can properly claim the award of costs against the libellants, as a protection and immunity against subsequent suits on their part It is by no means clear that

Bronson v. Crestwood Lake Section 1 Holding Corp.

724 F. Supp. 148 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 23, 1989

Consequently, non-minorities qualify at a rate of more than twice that for minorities. … Yet, plaintiffs have established that the 1980 census data is the most recent compilation available.

Electronic Specialty Co. v. International Controls Corp.

295 F. Supp. 1063 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 19, 1968

Dresser Industries, Inc., 383 F.2d 840 (2d Cir. 1967), that the corporate plaintiff in this case does have standing to sue, the authorities clearly establish that in the factual context of this case the corporation is a proper … He has retained competent counsel, clearly qualified to serve the interests of all non-tenderers.

Wall Street Associates, L.P. v. Becker Paribas, Inc.

818 F. Supp. 679 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 28, 1993

Defendants argue that these cases establish that where a party does not agree to arbitrate before a particular forum, that forum does not have jurisdiction. … The error must have been obvious and capable of being readily and instantly perceived by the average person qualified to serve as an arbitrator.

American Civil Liberties Union v. United States Department of Justice

210 F. Supp. 3d 467 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 27, 2016

“[T]o establish the adequacy of a search, agency affidavits must be relatively detailed and nonconclusory, and submitted in good faith.” Grand Cent. … Relationship Between the Work Product Privilege and the Working Law Doctrine It has been clearly established for nearly forty years that documents diselosable under FOIA as agency working law may nevertheless be withheld

International Business MacHines Corp. v. Johnson

629 F. Supp. 2d 321 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 26, 2009

In consideration for the promise not to compete, 5 employees were eligible to continue qualifying for certain equity grants— grants that they had qualified to receive before the implementation of the non-compete regime. … Rule 30(b)(6) clearly states that the person "designated must testify about information known or reasonably available to the organization.”

In Re September 11th Liability Insurance Coverage Cases

458 F. Supp. 2d 104 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 8, 2006

The Gulf Policy clearly disclaimed coverage of defense costs. … The data was lacking because it appeared that the Port Authority defended itself and was benefited by a sovereign immunity defense. 9 .

Lovely H. v. Eggleston

235 F.R.D. 248 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 19, 2006

Here, the Plaintiffs are clearly disabled as that term is used under New York law. … Segregation under the ADA is permitted only in the specific and narrow circumstance where an agency establishes that such segregation is “necessary to provide qualified individuals with disabilities with aids, benefits or

Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc.

886 F. Supp. 1120 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 13, 1995

This is clearly such a case and therefore no fair use exception is warranted. … This means that they have the right to use the by the [sic] procedure established by law.

Brown v. Bronx Cross County Medical Group

834 F. Supp. 105 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 14, 1993

The Patterson Court clearly excluded racial harassment during employment from the scope of § 1981, stating' “racial harassment relating to the conditions of employment is not actionable under § 1981 because that provision … Section 1983 limits state sovereign immunity by enabling a private citizen to bring a claim against a state official, or an individual acting under color of state law, for violation of that private citizen’s constitutional

Placencia Jr. v. NYC/NYC DOC

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 27, 2025

It appears that Plaintiff’s financial status has not changed, and Plaintiff therefore qualifies as indigent. … The case implicates not only various constitutional provisions, but also — among Defendants’ eleven defenses — governmental immunity and the Prison Litigation Reform Act. (See Dkt. #29).

Laurie Visual Etudes, Inc. v. Chesebrough-Pond's, Inc.

473 F. Supp. 951 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 29, 1979

Its pendent claims are so clearly rooted in state law that in the absence of requisite federal jurisdiction they should be pursued in the state courts. … In determining which asserted facts are established for the purposes of this summary judgment motion, the Court has not accepted conclusory statements but has relied upon established facts. SEC v.