Case law

Tyson v. The Town of Ramapo

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

The Court in DiMeglio granted summary judgment to the defendant, holding that the plaintiff failed to establish she was qualified for GML § 207-c so as to make out a prima facie showing of gender discrimination. … Halpern United States District Judge Given the conclusions reached herein, the Court need not and does not reach Defendants’ alternate argument regarding qualified immunity.

Integrated Resources, Inc. v. Ameritrust Co. National (In Re Integrated Resources, Inc.)

157 B.R. 66 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 9, 1993

These facts are not “clearly erroneous as found.” See, e.g., Am Intern, supra, at 81. … The bankruptcy judge held that such claims would qualify under 11 U.S.C. § 553 as a “recoupment” and not as a “set-off.”

Meijer, Inc. v. Ferring B.V.

903 F. Supp. 2d 198 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 17, 2012

On July 1, 2005, the FDA denied Ferring’s citizen petition, concluding that Ferring had not proffered evidence as to why the FDA should depart from its well-established methodologies to establish bioequivalence, and further … The fraud stripped the patentee of the antitrust immunity it would otherwise enjoy. Id. at 177 , 86 S.Ct. 347 .

Desai

District Court, S.D. New York · May 6, 2026

If it comes to a Producing Party’s attention that designated material does not qualify for protection at all—or does not qualify for the level of protection initially asserted—the Producing Party must promptly notify all … Each redaction shall be clearly labeled “REDACTED” or with a comparable legend, and the Producing Party shall preserve an unredacted copy. 3.

Walder v. White Plains Board of Education

738 F. Supp. 2d 483 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 24, 2010

Rather, we hold that the Supreme Court’s decision in Reeves clearly mandates a case-by-case approach, with a court examining the entire record to determine whether the plaintiff could satisfy his “ultimate burden of persuading … For purposes of this motion, WPSD concedes that Walder “is a member of a protected class and that she was qualified for her job.” (Dkt. No. 31: WPSD Br. at 4.)

Varela v. Marshall

520 F. Supp. 2d 471 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 2, 2007

A state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law if the state court “applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [Supreme Court precedent]” or “confronts a set of facts that are materially … An erroneous evidentiary ruling may qualify for habeas relief only if the error violated petitioner’s due process rights to such an extent as to deprive him of a fundamentally fair — trial.

Meringolo v. City of New York

908 F. Supp. 160 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 28, 1995

. § 213 (a), which establishes an exemption for “bona fide executive, administrative and professional employees.” … Pursuant to this grant of authority, the DOL enacted two regulations, which established a “duties test” and a “salary basis test” to determine if an employee qualifies as a “bona fide executive”, who is exempt from the FLSA

Archer Gardens, Ltd. v. Brooklyn Center Development Corp.

468 F. Supp. 609 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 22, 1979

It is well established that private persons may act “under color” of state law, and hence be held liable under section 1983 when they act in conspiracy with state officials. Adickes v. S. H. … City of Detroit, 254 F.Supp. 655 (E.D.Mich.1966), aff’d, 405 F.2d 138 (6th Cir. 1968), which is “clearly within the district court’s ‘federal question jurisdiction.’ ” Muskegon Theatres, Inc. v.

Santoro Ex Rel. Santoro v. Donnelly

340 F. Supp. 2d 464 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2004

Although Goldberg’s educational background is somewhat murky, an expert may be qualified by experience. 73 Given Goldberg’s experience in the fields of packaging and industrial design, he is qualified to render an expert … [New York] courts have required ... that warnings must clearly alert the user to avoid certain unsafe uses of the product which would appear to be normal and reasonable.” 151 There are several important considerations that

Carpenters Pension Trust Fund v. Barclays PLC

310 F.R.D. 69 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 20, 2015

market analysts on October 31, 2008. 1 Diamond’s statements were that: (1) “we’re categorically not paying higher rates in any currency” and (2) “we benefit in times of turmoil, so we post where we’re transacting, and it’s clearly … Courts within this Circuit have repeatedly found Robbins Geller to be adequate and well-qualified for the purpose of litigating class action lawsuits. 219 Thus, Robbins Geller is qualified, and, along with Lead Plaintiffs

Young v. Halle Housing Associates, L.P.

152 F. Supp. 2d 355 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 7, 2001

It is undisputed that the Muhlenberg is not a classic public housing project, operated directly by a state or municipal government, whose policies limiting residents’ freedom of association are clearly subject to constitutional … Such qualified language hardly establishes the degree of exclusivity required under the pub- *366 lie functions doctrine. 9 The State has an obligation under its Constitution to provide its children with an education, and

Harriram v. City University of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 31, 2024

Papelino v. 7 At this juncture, the Court rejects Defendant Barbera’s qualified immunity defense because “the facts supporting the defense” do not “appear on the face of the [C]omplaint.” Hyman v. Abrams, 630 F. … Indeed, a qualified immunity defense is “typically addressed at the summary judgment stage” because it “usually depends on the facts of the case, … making dismissal at the pleading stage inappropriate.” Woods v.

United States v. Glass Menagerie, Inc.

721 F. Supp. 54 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 6, 1989

According to Agent Giattino, these invoices established interstate trafficking in drug paraphernalia by The Glass Menagerie. … This Court is reluctant to declare that this statute, directed as it clearly is against the “head shops,” is void on its face and in all events as to everybody.

United States Trust Co. of New York v. Alpert

163 F.R.D. 409 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 21, 1995

They clearly have the resources to handle the task. Class B. Former Holders. The firm of Fiorenza & Hayes, S.C. … Without belaboring the point, the attorneys at each firm who would be responsible for handling this action are clearly experienced, capable and qualified to represent the class herein.

Abreu v. Colvin

152 F. Supp. 3d 166 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 6, 2015

The contested issue here is whether Madeline and Jairo each qualify as a “child” of Mr. Martinez. A. … Thus, New York intestacy law does not clearly mandate a finding that Jairo is Mr. Martinez’s child. B.

Ramirez v. Riverbay Corp.

39 F. Supp. 3d 354 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 1, 2014

Rule 23 requirement have been established.” Id. at 41 . … “To establish liability under the ...

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Young

925 F. Supp. 164 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 2, 1996

First, Gallo claims that application of New York law is not clearly warranted as it may be appropriate for the Court to apply federal law. … Sept. 18, 1995), this Court dismissed several counts of this action on the ground that section 12 U.S.C. § 1821 (k) of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”) establishes gross

Ferguson v. Mobil Oil Corp.

443 F. Supp. 1334 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 24, 1978

Clearly the charges before the EEOC never gave Mobil any of the notice the Title VII scheme and due process mandates, see Bailey, supra, 563 F.2d at 450 . … This conclusion evolves from the realization that although such behavior is obviously reprehensible and probably tortious, it is clearly not discriminatory.

Compania Transatlantica Espanola, S.A. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

748 F. Supp. 214 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 15, 1990

The terms “chassis” and “trailer” are clearly not interchangeable in this case. … Tested by that standard, Interpool was clearly not an owner.

Sharkey v. Lasmo (AUL Ltd.)

992 F. Supp. 321 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 21, 1998

[for] which [he] was qualified.” See Ex. E. Sharkey filed a complaint with this Court in June 1994 (the “Complaint” or “Cplt.”). … Even in these papers, Sharkey does not “clearly” set forth the claim.