Case law

Muniz v. United States

360 F. Supp. 2d 574 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 14, 2005

Muniz claims that the exception carved out in the Application Note for cases where “it is clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense,” see U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, Application Note 3, is applicable in this … The plea agreement also afforded Muniz immunity from further prosecution for participation in the charged drug conspiracy and for possessing firearms in furtherance of that conspiracy. See id. at 1-2.

Commercial Data Servers, Inc. v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION

262 F. Supp. 2d 50 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 4, 2003

(“Systems that use the P/390EE and are defined and compared to other Entry Systems will qualify for ESL software pricing... … The record evidence does not clearly establish that there is a definable “low end” market within the computer systems market.

Olivares v. Ercole

975 F. Supp. 2d 345 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 27, 2013

, in pertinent part, that the state court decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 … In sum, petitioner has not shown that the Appellate Division’s decision was either “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law[.]” See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1).

Smith v. Mitlof

198 F. Supp. 2d 492 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 17, 2002

Clearly, neither of these conditions is met with respect to the instant contract which is unequivocally one for the sale of a vessel. … Furthermore, plaintiffs’ claims in this respect clearly satisfy the requisite maritime nexus because the plaintiffs were injured on a vessel engaged in maritime commerce.

Branch v. Annucci

District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 28, 2022

The party asserting subject matter jurisdiction carries the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that jurisdiction exists. Morrison v. … DISCUSSION Defendants move to dismiss the complaint on various grounds including mootness, lack of personal involvement, failure to comply with F.R.C.P. 8, failure to state a cause of action, qualified immunity,

Davis-Bell v. Columbia University

851 F. Supp. 2d 650 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 19, 2012

American female); and (2) she was qualified for her position. … In order to establish a prima facie case of a discriminatory failure to promote, a Title VII plaintiff ordinarily must demonstrate that: “(1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she applied and was qualified for a job

In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation

438 F. Supp. 2d 291 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 23, 2006

Here, the only relevant policy determination would be if Congress had decided to ban the use of MTBE or grant manufacturers immunity from lawsuits asserting damages attributable to the use of MTBE. … Because I find that neither of the Baker factors defendants invoked applies to this case, I need not reach the issue of whether, in general, the Supreme Court’s application of Baker establishes that the political question

Revson v. Claire's Stores, Inc.

120 F. Supp. 2d 322 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 30, 2000

But plaintiff overlooks the fact that Section 5-701, subd. b, applies only to “qualified financial contracts” as there defined. 4 The alleged contract here at issue is not a qualified financial contract within the meaning … But the fact that defendants admit having denied that request does not necessarily establish the absence of a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Boutiques breached its agreement.

Feliz v. Conway

378 F. Supp. 2d 425 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 25, 2005

Defendant’s homicidal intent was clearly established by evidence that he fired six shots at his intended victim, with whom he had an ongoing drug-related dispute. … If a petitioner’s claims were previously decided on the merits, habeas relief may be granted only if the state court’s decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law

Risco v. McHugh

868 F. Supp. 2d 75 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 14, 2012

“Establishing that an individual is ‘regarded as having such an impairment’ does not, by itself establish liability. … to establish an objectively hostile work environment.

Lopez v. U.S. Department of the Interior

District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 19, 2022

New York has not waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity to suit in federal court, and Congress did not abrogate the states’ immunity in enacting 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Trotman v. … Federal agencies are immune from suit unless their sovereign immunity has been waived. Robinson v. Overseas Military Sales Corp., 21 F.3d 502, 510 (2d Cir. 1994); Brooks v.

Gibran v. ALFRED A. KNOPF, INCORPORATED

153 F. Supp. 854 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 29, 1957

“Administrator” there-clearly refers to one appointed in the event of intestacy, and not to an “administrator c. t. a.” who acts to enforce the terms of a will which has been admitted to probate and so carries out the-wishes … Two principles are well established: (1) that the testator’s intention must be carried out; In re Butler’s Will, 1 A.D.2d 548 , 151 N.Y.S.2d 866, 869 ; and (2) there is a presumption that a testator did not intend to die

Green Haven Prison Preparative Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 28, 2022

Plaintiffs clearly relied on all three documents in framing the Complaint and all three documents are clearly and substantially referenced in the Complaint. (See Compl. ¶¶ 50–64, 106.) … Clause, (see id. at 21–22); (7) Plaintiffs have failed to state an equal protection claim, (see id. at 22); and (8) Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, (see id. at 22–23).

United States v. One Mercedes-Benz 380 Sel Vin. WDBCA 33A1BB10331

604 F. Supp. 1307 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 20, 1984

This clearly establishes probable cause in respect of the use being made of the Mercedes. Claimant does not really contend otherwise. … Nor, apart from Brown’s qualified disclaimer (which I do not credit), 1 is there any basis in the evidence to infer doubt on his part with respect to Brewington’s authority.

Gonzalez v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc.

493 F. Supp. 499 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 3, 1980

The complaint alleges that the defendants falsely represented to the plaintiff that his financial status was sufficient to qualify him as an investor in futures trading on a margin account basis when they in fact knew or … Rule 10b-5 prior to the Act for a customer injured in a commodity options transaction has now been clearly displaced by the new customer reparations procedure.

United States v. Soblen

203 F. Supp. 542 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 3, 1961

Beker, the defense attempted to establish that the reports that Mrs. … Since it clearly appears that some of the essential conditions prescribed by Rule 15 do not exist, the defendant has not established the minimal prerequisites for obtaining leave to take the proposed deposition.

Swanhart v. State of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 24, 2022

Beach; (3) Plaintiffs’ federal claims fail as a matter of law on several grounds; (4) Superintendent Beach and Trooper Jackson are entitled to qualified immunity; (5) Plaintiffs’ state law claims fail as a matter of law … In sum, as all of Plaintiffs’ federal claims against Defendants fail, the Court need not address Defendants’ arguments on qualified immunity.

Gulino v. Board of Education of the City School District of New York

236 F. Supp. 2d 314 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 25, 2002

It is certain that the policy in question qualifies as “continuing” by the Second Circuit’s definition. … To establish a prima facie showing in a disparate impact case, plaintiffs must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence that the employer “uses a particular employment practice that causes a disparate impact on the basis

Kinoy v. Mitchell

67 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 3, 1975

Privilege for military and state secrets The first of the Richardson affidavits is clearly an attempt to assert the well-established governmental privilege which protects absolutely secrets of state and military secrets, … This is not an assertion of the well established and absolute military or state secrets privilege discussed above.

Zarcone v. Condie

62 F.R.D. 563 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 16, 1974

The 1963 amendment to Federal Rule 4(d)(7) clearly renders the law of New Jersey irrelevant to service of process in the instant case. … Lastly, plaintiff contends that the methods for out of state service of process established by New York law are applicable to this case and were complied with by the Marshal in effecting the September 21, 1972 delivery.