Case law

AMTAX Holdings 227, LLC v. CohnReznick LLP

District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 4, 2024

Federal jurisdiction only lies if “a right or immunity created by the Constitution or laws of the United States . . . … Allowing federal jurisdiction over countless state-law tort claims concerning accountants’ interpretation of the Code would clearly disrupt the appropriate balance of federal and state judicial

Copeland v. Rosen

38 F. Supp. 2d 298 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 9, 1999

Plaintiff further alleges through the proffer of evidence that Rosen has a particular disdain for black male students, and has turned away black male student applicants even when they are more qualified than accepted applicants … Such an employment decision is clearly an adverse change in the terms and conditions of plaintiffs employ with Lincoln.

Mutual Benefit Life Insurance v. Morley

722 F. Supp. 1048 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 4, 1989

Clearly, Morley failed in that duty, inducing Mutual Benefit to issue her a policy that it otherwise might not have issued. Defendants’ attempt to rely on New England Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. … Whereas Markman “in no way misrepresented the extent of her problem,” id. at 1099 , Morley clearly did not reveal the extent of her mental illness.

Mauriber v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.

567 F. Supp. 1231 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 11, 1983

Morgan Stanley, Inc., 553 F.Supp. 1347 (S.D.N.Y.1983), the legislative history establishes equally clearly that Congress intentionally declined to limit the reach of the statute to defendants with connections to organized … I can imagine no construction of those words which would exclude from their coverage the primary victims of such a scheme and which would render such defendants immune from civil sanctions.

Allen v. Thomas

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 26, 2021

The Court must dismiss an IFP 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 … There is no such thing as property in a trade- mark except as a right appurtenant to an established business or trade in connection with which the mark is employed.

Hackensack Water Company v. Village of Nyack

289 F. Supp. 671 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 16, 1968

Clearly, matters of this kind, if pertinent, cannot be resolved on these motions. … Issues of motive and intent of plaintiff’s acts are clearly present.

Edwards v. Gizzi

District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 2, 2022

It therefore must contain all of the claims and factual allegations 8 Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Defs.’ Mem. 1; see id. at 12–13.) … The Court will not opine on whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, however, because Plaintiff has not plausibly pled that he is entitled to relief.

United States v. Jacques Dessange, Inc.

103 F. Supp. 2d 701 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 28, 2000

He returned to the United States from France for the trial and testified under a cooperation agreement that provided him with immunity from prosecution. … First, the intention to benefit the corporation is clearly stated and is an essential part of the very definition of "acting within the scope of employment.”

Rivera v. Baccarat, Inc.

34 F. Supp. 2d 870 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 8, 1999

In this case, Baccarat argues that no such award may be granted because front pay is included within the statutory cap on damages as established by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and that cap has already been met by the jury … This is clearly a typographical error, since the plaintiff did not begin to work at Bernardaud until October 1995, and she testified at trial that she was laid off in July 1996. (Tr. 377-78). 4 .

Steward Partners Global Advisory, LLC v. Tucker

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 16, 2024

New York law provides “absolute immunity from liability for defamation” for statements made by a witness in connection with a court proceeding. See Front, Inc. v. … The opinion contains no additional analysis, does not specify the type of privilege being applied or who made the protected statements, and does not clearly extend the qualified pre-litigation privilege to witness statements

Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. '21' International Holdings, Inc.

821 F. Supp. 212 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 11, 1993

Such facts, if proven, could establish that 21 International was entitled to call Westinghouse’s bluff and drop *218 the deal. … Guenther is clearly distinguishable.

Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp. v. Epstein

212 F. Supp. 376 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 27, 1962

Thus plaintiff is clearly threatened with irreparable injury, since it will be put out of business by the Liquor Authority unless it is successful in this action. … It was available to qualified carriers for a nominal fee.

Gibson v. Hurleyville Fire Co. No. 1

1 F. Supp. 2d 329 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 16, 1998

Under Title VII case law the burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination is minimal. … It is well established that a court may grant summary judgment to the non-moving party despite the absence of a cross-motion by that party. See Celotex Corp. v.

Coca-Cola Co. v. Tropicana Products, Inc.

538 F. Supp. 1091 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 13, 1982

Granted the phrase “pure pasteurized juice as it comes from the orange” is a nonsequitur, its inherent inconsistency, however, does not defeat completely its value as a qualifier of the visual statement. … Therefore, plaintiff has not established the necessary predominance on its side of the balance.

Design Strategies, Inc. v. Davis

384 F. Supp. 2d 649 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 11, 2005

Although the first of these elements has been established, the Court finds there is insufficient evidence in the record before it to establish the second or third elements. … He reasonably could have concluded that Design was not interested in or qualified to pursue the Contentville business.

Duke v. Touche Ross & Co.

765 F. Supp. 69 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 21, 1991

Chevron, held that in order for a new rule “to qualify for purely prospective application, a judicial decision ‘must establish a new principle of law, either by overruling clear past precedent on which litigants may have … relied, ... or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.’

Harris v. Denully

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

Christopher.1 The underlying events allegedly took place on Centre Street in 1 In this complaint Plaintiff does not clearly identify the Defendants, but he provides more identifying information about some of them in … Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 152 (1970)), the representation of a defendant by private counsel in state criminal proceedings does not constitute the degree of state involvement or interference necessary to establish a claim

Devane v. Doe

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

Under the prison mailbox rule, the date a plaintiff signs a court submission qualifies as the filing date. See, e.g.,Nash v. Kressman, No. 11-CV-7327, 2013 WL 6197087, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. … Nov. 27, 2013) (finding that signature date on cover letter, which accompanied pro se complaint,established filing date for purposes of prison mailbox rule). See generally Houston v.

Wallace v. Brown

485 F. Supp. 77 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 9, 1979

Respondents clearly had the opportunity to raise this argument at the trial. Major Querfeld, presumably, was as readily available then as he is now. … Since findings of fact of a trial court are entitled to presumptive validity both on appellate review and in proceedings to amend factual findings and judgment, the moving party has a heavy burden to establish factual error

Matter of Emergency Beacon Corp.

52 B.R. 979 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 21, 1985

The question is whether a reasonable attorney could have concluded that facts supporting the claim might be established, not whether such facts actually had been established." Nemeroff v. … These findings are not clearly erroneous. 10 .