Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.70s
893 F. Supp. 225 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 8, 1995
If this is in fact what happened, the public policy embodied in § 1981 clearly requires that plaintiff be provided with a remedy. … To establish a claim under § 1985(3), plaintiff must show that the defendants (1) engaged in a conspiracy; (2) acted for the purpose of depriving a person of equal protection of the laws or equal privileges and immunities
Cited 21 timesPublished249 F. Supp. 681 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 2, 1965
with her position at trial], which are most germane to the question of plaintiff’s shelter, were the Department of Welfare’s business and the prac *686 tice * * * of maintaining records on those receiving welfare support qualified … As the statute clearly states, such a matter may be shown to affect the weight to be given the report, but it does not preclude its admission in evidence.” 263 F.2d at 615.
Cited 37 timesPublishedOkun v. Montefiore Medical Center
970 F. Supp. 2d 267 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 10, 2013
was established or is maintained for the purpose of providing for its participants or their beneficiaries ... … Once an employee qualifies for severance, severance payments are made based on an arithmetical calculation of how much the employee is owed.
Cited 4 timesPublishedWitcher v. New York City Department of Education
District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 23, 2023
A decision is “clearly erroneous” when, “upon review of the entire record, [the court is] left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v. … is not established.”)
Cited 0 timesUnknown423 F. Supp. 2d 129 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 14, 2006
The remaining defendants also argue qualified immunity, but it is not necessary to reach that issue, since plaintiff has not made out any constitutional violation. … S, IG Inv., Confidential 159-189. ■ The cumulation of this evidence was sufficient to convince the independent arbitrator (who had the opportunity to perceive plaintiffs testimony on the issue), and clearly satisfies defendants
Cited 4 timesPublishedNational Gear & Piston, Inc. v. Cummins Power Systems, LLC
861 F. Supp. 2d 344 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 17, 2012
“Here, the parties’ briefs assume that New York law controls this issue, and such implied consent is sufficient to establish choice of law.” Motorola Credit Corp. v. … National Gear and Piston does not have any qualified technicians trained for current or past midrange Cummins engines.
Cited 38 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Aug 25, 2020
�e State of New York has not waived its sovereign immunity in cases like these; nor has Congress abrogated that immunity. See Chris H. v. New York, 764 F. App’x 53, 55 (2d Cir. 2019). … �e claims against Judge Mulroy clearly meet this bar.
Cited 0 timesUnknownJohn H. Woodbury, Inc. v. William A. Woodbury Corp.
23 F. Supp. 162 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 31, 1938
This, clearly, was unjustifiable. … Confusion being established beyond all doubt, should the injunction be qualified or absolute? Plaintiff contends _ that, after William A.
Cited 8 timesPublishedRobinson v. Sanctuary Record Groups, Ltd.
542 F. Supp. 2d 284 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 8, 2008
a magistrate judge’s report may adopt those portions to which no “specific, written objection” is made, as long as the factual and legal bases supporting the findings and conclusions set forth in those sections are not clearly … established now.”).)
Vacated on other grounds by Robinson v. Sanctuary Records, 383 F. App'x 54 (2010)Cited 10 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Jul 10, 2023
The Documents produced in response to this request shall be marked and arranged in such a way as to indicate clearly the request to which each such document is responsive. 21. Scope. … Privilege or Immunity from Production.
Cited 0 timesUnknownGianna Enterprises v. Miss World (Jersey) Ltd.
551 F. Supp. 1348 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 6, 1982
Under this section, which retains traditional common-law means of acquiring jurisdiction, jurisdiction may be gained over out-of-state defendants that establish sufficient contacts with the state to establish that they were … The relationship between the owners of Miss World and World-Wide establishes the defendants’ jurisdictional presence.
Cited 59 timesPublishedCary Oil Co. v. MG Refining & Marketing, Inc.
230 F. Supp. 2d 439 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 31, 2002
Absent some exception to § 4, the flexie contracts would therefore qualify as unlawful off-exchange futures contracts. … Although Plaintiffs also assert that the flexie contracts at issue qualify for the trade option exception, they are clearly incorrect.
Cited 10 timesPublished795 F. Supp. 1307 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 27, 1992
The Court of Appeals explained the Chevron test as follows: To qualify for purely prospective application, a 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.’
Cited 21 timesPublished257 F. Supp. 209 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 1, 1966
By constitutional amendments and implementing statutes effective September 1, 1962, the State of New York undertook to establish a more nearly unified court system. … In any event, at this preliminary stage, plaintiffs make no convincing demonstration that it lacks “some reasonable basis;” and they are clearly not entitled to a restraint merely because it may be that the classification
Cited 1 timesPublished38 B.R. 155 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 9, 1984
In addition, case law clearly establishes that a nonoperating trustee is liable for the payment of federal income tax. See In re I.J. … As the Court in Frankel, supra, stated: “Congress could very easily have manifested any other intent by a limiting or qualifying provision.” Frankel, 192 F.Supp. at 777-78 .
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Oct 9, 2025
Although Plaintiff alleges that Besso was “assigned” to represent him, (AC at 24), “it is well-established that court-appointed attorneys performing a lawyer’s traditional functions as counsel . . . do not act under color … The conduct with which Plaintiff takes issue – Judge Senft’s decision that adjournments counted against Plaintiff for Speedy Trial Act purposes (AC at 24, 27-28) – was clearly judicial action. See Coombs v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownCity of New York v. TAVERN ON THE GREEN, LP
427 B.R. 233 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 10, 2010
However, the court in Bazaar did not examine the question of prior rights under New York law, and the facts of that case are clearly distinguishable. … Angel Flight Am., Inc., 522 F.3d 1200, 1210-11 (11th Cir.2008) (“Purposely failing to disclose other users’ rights to use the same or similar marks may qualify as a material *243 omission justifying cancellation of a trademark
Cited 12 timesPublishedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · Jan 20, 2026
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 … claim of conspiracy under Section 1985(3), a plaintiff must allege facts suggesting the existence of: (1) a conspiracy; (2) for the purpose of depriving the plaintiff of the equal protection (or the equal privileges or immunities
Cited 0 timesUnknownState of Qatar v. First Abu Dhabi Bank PJSC
District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 14, 2020
No. 34-6 (Saudi royal decree establishing the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency). … The Court is thus skeptical that an entity could qualify as an organ even though it does not satisfy any of the Filler factors.
Cited 0 timesUnknownSecurities and Exchange Commission v. Cooper
402 F. Supp. 516 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 7, 1975
The evidence also establishes that the architect of this operation was the defendant D’Onofrio. … Merely consulting the SEC on a rescission offer’s terms and reporting the names of purchasers in an offering does not immunize the parties involved in the offering.
Cited 5 timesPublished
Ask Donna