Case law

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.’

Metrokane, Inc. v. the Wine Enthusiast

160 F. Supp. 2d 633 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 8, 2001

The structure of the Rabbit corkscrew is clearly derived from that of the expired Screwpull utility patent. (See Am. … Distinctiveness is, moreover, an explicit prerequisite for registration of trade dress under § 2, and “the general principles qualifying a mark for registration under § 2 of the Lanham Act are for the most part applicable

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.

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 .

Agugliaro v. Brooks Bros., Inc.

927 F. Supp. 741 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 11, 1996

Under the McDonnell Douglas test, plaintiff has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of unlawful discrimination. … To establish a prima facie case, plaintiff must demonstrate that: (i) he is a member of a protected class, (ii) qualified for the position, (in) who was subjected to an adverse employment decision, (iv) under circumstances

Adams v. Marwil (In Re Bayou Group, L.L.C.)

363 B.R. 674 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 2, 2007

Thus, this court’s Order clearly contemplated appointing Marwil as both a receiver and as Bayou’s corporate management. … First, this court clearly never intended for its Order to delineate all of Marwil’s duties as a debtor-in-possession under the Bankruptcy Code.

Waterman v. Aakre

31 F. Supp. 8 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 29, 1939

Consequently, these are the master facts which constitute the background against which less clearly established or really controversial facts must be examined and tested. … John, also establishes that, during said period, she had traveled to the westward almost one mile.

New York State National Organization for Women v. Cuomo

182 F.R.D. 30 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 3, 1998

Both Wagner and Akabas clearly are qualified experts in their fields and their testimony was adequately geared towards assisting the trier of fact reach a conclusion about the level of harm inflicted by SDHR’s initial rejection … He first noted discrepancies in the record as to whether the Division considered part-time employees to be employees for purposes of establishing SDHR jurisdiction over an employer. (Report at 33).

Winkler-Koch Engineering Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co.

100 F. Supp. 15 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 16, 1951

Company, 322 U.S. 471 , 64 S.Ct. 1110 , 88 L.Ed. 1399 , all of the patents which were relied upon by defendants in obtaining a trial upon the merits of an infringement action against a Winkler-Koch still user were either clearly … The facts alleged in the complaint (which for the purpose of this separate trial are to he taken as true) establish a single wrong and constitute a single cause of action. 7.

Habitat for Horses v. Salazar

745 F. Supp. 2d 438 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 21, 2010

Injured horses would be treated by a veterinarian or, if necessary, humanely euthanized by qualified personnel. (EA at 27.) … There, they will be available for adoption or sale to qualified individuals or taken to long-term pastures. (EA at 30.)

Smith v. New York City Department of Education

808 F. Supp. 2d 569 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 18, 2011

“Under New York law, collateral estoppel precludes a plaintiff from contesting in a subsequent action issues clearly raised in a prior proceeding and decided against that party, irrespective of whether the tribunals or causes … To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination under the ADEA, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment action

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Big Apple Industrial Buildings, Inc.

655 F. Supp. 1179 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 13, 1987

I am persuaded that the facts alleged here, although they may well support a state law fraud action, do not establish a violation of the federal RICO statute. … As a threshold matter, the complaint is clearly defective for failure to allege properly the "racketeering activity,” within the scope of the statute.

Forte v. McNellis

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 2023

Nov. 2, 2020), report and 13 Even if Plaintiff’s arrest was without probable cause, the police officers would still be immune from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity, which protects an officer “so long … For a similar reason, qualified immunity applies to Plaintiff’s malicious prosecution claim. See Diop, 50 F. Supp. at 422 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (applying qualified immunity to a malicious prosecution claim).

Anderson v. Townsend

District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 26, 2022

Absent a waiver, sovereign immunity “bars the award of monetary damages against state officials in their official capacities.” Exxon Mobil Corp. v. … Plaintiff's suggestion that qualified immunity does not appear on the face of the complaint because the defendants failed to comply with their own policy smuggles in the assumption that the Court must accept Mr.

United States v. Buettner-Janusch

500 F. Supp. 1285 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 29, 1980

Such a conclusion is not an inference compelled because the witnesses initially gave testimony exculpatory to Defendant, received immunity, and then recanted and testified for the Government. … He cannot be bound by the acts or declarations of other participants unless it is established that a conspiracy existed and he was one of the conspirators.” (Tr. pp. 2091-92.)

B. v. Bureau Wijsmuller v. United States

487 F. Supp. 156 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 20, 1979

Wijsmuller qualifies under those criteria. … That question necessarily led to considerations of sovereign immunity from suit.

Balogun v. New York State Division of Human Rights

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 16, 2022

First, a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that (1) he belongs to a protected class, (2) he was qualified for the position he held, (3) he suffered an adverse employment action and … Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445, 448 (1976) (holding that Congress has abrogated the states’ sovereign immunity for employment discrimination claims under Title VII).

Kohlbrenner

District Court, S.D. New York · May 18, 2026

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 … Because Defendants are private parties who do not work for a state or government body, and do not qualify as state actors, Plaintiff has not stated a Section 1983 claim against them.

Rosette v. Rainbo Record Manufacturing Corporation

354 F. Supp. 1183 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 26, 1973

The intent of the parties was clearly to transfer whatever title Lincoln may have or may acquire. This is particularly evident in light of the fact that Mrs. … But note that the Copyright Act was amended on October 15, 1971 to provide that sound recordings may now qualify for copyright protection. Pub.L. 92-140, 85 Stat. 391. 9 .