Case law

Perez

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 25, 2025

The PREP Act provides immunity from suit for the United States and manufacturers, distributors, program planners, and other qualified persons who prescribed, administered, or dispensed a qualified countermeasure, such … Supp. 3d 257, 267 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) (“Where a party seeking a temporary restraining order fails to establish a likelihood of success on the merits, ‘there is no need to address the other prongs of the analysis.’”

National Coalition on Black Civic Participation v. Wohl

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 17, 2021

They also argue that the robocall message at issue was clearly provided by Wohl and Burkman and that Message did not co-create the message simply by “allow[ing] its customers to select where … There are three elements of immunity under Section 230(c)(1). First, a defendant claiming immunity must be a “provider or user of an interactive computer service.” 47 U.S.C.

Matthew v. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2022

The remaining claims against TCPA are dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds. … Eleventh Amendment Sovereign Immunity Defendants argue that TCPA and the Individual Defendants in their official capacity are entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity except with respect

Mayer v. Josiah Wedgwood & Sons, Ltd.

601 F. Supp. 1523 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 7, 1985

Pic’s predecessor corporation, Josiah Wedgwood & Sons, Ltd., qualified to do business in New York in 1915, but it stopped doing business in New York in 1919, when JWS Inc. was organized. … Mayer’s snowflake design clearly is within the subject matter of the copyright laws.

Shakur

District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 12, 2026

Combs has established an extremely sophisticated network, per Ms. Ventura’s lawsuit, and I suspect that Caresha Brownlee, Victoria Norris, Gene Deal, and SECURITAS INC. still have ties to that network. … A complaint is “‘factually frivolous’ if the sufficiently well-pleaded facts are ‘clearly baseless’−that is, if they are ‘fanciful,’ ‘fantastic,’ or ‘delusional.’” Gallop v.

Nomura Holding America, Inc. v. Federal Insurance

45 F. Supp. 3d 354 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 11, 2014

Oct. 21, 2010) (“One suit over your business practices in one state [ ] cannot mean that your insurer is forever immune from having to extend coverage in future suits.”). … On this basis, the Underlying Actions clearly allege facts which are the “same” as or “similar to” those alleged in Plumbers’ Union.

Lefebvre v. Morgan

234 F. Supp. 3d 445 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 10, 2017

No. 37).) 3 It is “established law in this Circuit that ... a plaintiff alleging retaliation [must] establish [he engaged in] speech protected by the First Amendment.” Sousa v. … As the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for violation of his constitutional rights, the Court declines to consider Defendants’ arguments that they are entitled to qualified immunity. (See Defs.’

In Re PepsiCo, Inc., Bottled Water Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation

588 F. Supp. 2d 527 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 8, 2008

In contrast, an “occurrence that merely motivates an optional decision” — such as the threat of a state law damages remedy for violation of an existing federal requirement — does not itself qualify as a requirement. … If a product is from a community water system, the label must clearly disclose this fact except as provided in § 165.110(a)(3)(H).

Douglin v. GreatBanc Trust Co.

115 F. Supp. 3d 404 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 30, 2015

Rule 23(a)(4) requires a two-part inquiry to ensure that the class, counsel is “qualified, experienced and generally able to conduct the litigation,” and that the class members do “not have interests that are antagonistic … Second, thé named plaintiffs provide declarations establishing the alignment of their interests with the class members. (Feinberg Decl. Exs. 8-10).

Low v. Equity Programs, Ltd.

882 F. Supp. 344 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 19, 1995

[the nonmoving party] fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.” Celotex Corp. v. … Here, the alleged management obligations clearly do not touch the land itself nor is there any privity of estate between the prom-isors and the promisees with respect to these obligations.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. CR Intrinsic Investors, LLC

164 F. Supp. 3d 433 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 4, 2016

Each Potentially Eligible Claimant shall have the burden of proof to establish the validity and amount of his or her claim, and that he or she qualifies as an Eligible Claimant; and the Distribution Agent shall have the right … 90) days; and (d) The name of a person or entity to contact, if the Eligible Claimant has any questions regarding the distribution. 2.36The Fair Fund distribution checks, on their face, or the accompanying mailing shall clearly

EEOC v. State of NY

729 F. Supp. 266 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 12, 1990

S.2d 212, 389 N.E.2d 808 (1979) (emphasis added). [7] Defendants have the burden of establishing that the exemption applies. … There is no doubt that Senator Ervin communicated his views regarding the purpose of this exemption clearly and prominently in the Senate debate. [11] The amendment as initially proposed also exempted any person chosen by

Joaquim Pedro de Morais Filho v. United States Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Wells Fargo & Company, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 15, 2026

REVIEW The Court must dismiss an JFP 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 … A complaint is “factually frivolous’ if the sufficiently well-pleaded facts are ‘clearly baseless’ — that is, if they are ‘fanciful,’ ‘fantastic,’ or ‘delusional.’” Gallop v.

Disabled American Veterans v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs

783 F. Supp. 187 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 31, 1992

The operation of Section 3205 to frustrate certain incompetent veterans’ ability and efforts to live independently and to avoid becoming wards of public institutions clearly establishes irreparable harm. 2. … Likelihood of Success on the Merits Plaintiffs have established a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their equal protection claim.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. British American Commodity Options Corp.

422 F. Supp. 662 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 20, 1976

question presented at this stage of the proceedings, namely an application for a preliminary injunction in advance of a trial upon the merits, [before the administrative law judge] is whether a violation . . . has been so clearly … established that defendants are, in effect, to be found at fault without awaiting the development of all the facts upon a trial.”

United States v. DePalma

466 F. Supp. 920 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 16, 1979

Both Shuford and Jordan indicated quite clearly to the trial judge not only that Jordan would testify if granted a severance, but also the precise content of the expected testimony and its importance. … Upon prior hearings on this subject, it was established that he is not a candidate for a coronary bypass at this time.

Swinson v. The City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 14, 2022

Supp. 3d 473, 491-92 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (collecting cases); and  It is not “clearly established,” for purposes of qualified immunity, that there is a constitutional … Ct. 4, 7 (2021) (discussing principles of qualified immunity).

Department of Economic Development v. Arthur Andersen & Co. (U.S.A.)

683 F. Supp. 1463 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 5, 1988

According to plaintiff, Bankers Life established a “de minimis ‘touch test’ ” under which a plaintiff need not establish a direct or close relationship between the fraudulent transaction and the purchase or sale of a security … This alleged violation qualifies as a “racketeering activity.” 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (1)(D).

Lowell Wiper Supply Co. v. Helen Shop, Inc.

235 F. Supp. 640 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 2, 1964

While the statutory penalty for refusal to permit inspection of the stock book was disallowed, the general inspection prayed for was granted. 26 Thus the only adjudication on which the defense of res judicata is founded is clearly … For criticism see Currie & Schreter, Unconstitutional Discrimination in the Conflict of Laws: Privileges and Immunities, 69 Yale L.J. 1323 , 1387-89 (1960). 9 . Nolan v.

United States v. Keegan

71 F. Supp. 623 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 13, 1947

Borchard said: “It will be seen that they have endeavored to restrict the indemnity to those only who are clearly shown to deserve it. … Furthermore, it seems to be well settled that statutes relaxing traditional governmental immunity from suit, or imposing new liability upon the Government, should be strictly construed. United States v.