Case law

B.W. Ex Rel. K.S. v. New York City Department of Education

716 F. Supp. 2d 336 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 3, 2010

To qualify for attorney’s fees, “a party need not prevail on all issues,” Student X v. N.Y. … However, IHO Joyner's decision clearly required such a change.

Mirza v. Orange Regional Medical Center

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 17, 2022

Stated simply, the movant must establish that the law favors the judgment sought. Gonzalez v. Rutherford Corp., 881 F. … May 21, 2012) (“[T]ermination clearly constitutes adverse action.”); N.Y. State Fin. Law. § 191(1) (creating a cause of action for employees “discharged” or “suspended” because of protected activity).

Vieira v. United States

District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 17, 2019

I found that defendant had “sufficiently demonstrated that prioritizing Work Orders at the West Point campus is clearly a discretionary function based upon policy considerations of operational needs, regulatory mandates … Where “the nonmoving party bears the burden of proof at trial, summary judgment is warranted if the nonmovant fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to [its] case.”

Nghiem v. United States Department of Veteran Affairs

451 F. Supp. 2d 599 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 5, 2006

Bureau of Prisons, 937 F.2d 26 , 30 n. 4 (2d Cir.1991) (“[A] prerequisite for relief under § 1983, which concerns the deprivation of rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the Constitution and federal laws, is that … Even if plaintiff had clearly articulated a Title VII cause of action, and had named the appropriate party as defendant, her claim would be time-barred.

Dixon v. Biden

District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 13, 2023

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action invoking the Securing the Protection of Our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage … frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible”); Livingston, 141 F.3d at 437 (“[A]n action is ‘frivolous’ when either: (1) the factual contentions are clearly

Lopez v. Greiner

323 F. Supp. 2d 456 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 12, 2004

F at 2-3), thus plainly qualifies as an adjudication on the merits. … F at 3.) *480 Because that court, adjudicated Lopez’s Sixth Amendment claim on the merits, to qualify for habeas relief, Lopez must establish that its determination is not merely incorrect, but an unreasonable application

Hughes v. City Of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 21, 2021

Defendants’ qualified immunity argument is misplaced. … Qualified immunity “protects government officials from suits seeking to impose personal liability for money damages based on unsettled rights or on conduct that was not objectively unreasonable.” Tenenbaum v.

COMMITTEE FOR PUBLIC ED. & RELIG. LIB. v. Rockefeller

322 F. Supp. 678 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 28, 1971

to aid religion, but rather to support the secular purpose of assuring that children attending nonpublic schools comply with the compulsory attendance laws of the state, that they are receiving an adequate education from qualified … In Data Processing (which followed by a year the Lemon opinion on which defendants rely) the Court quite clearly adopted a broadgauged approach to the definition of standing.

Villafane, Jr. v. City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 2023

However, “[a] threat of force does not constitute excessive force.” 4 Because the false arrest claim fails, the Court need not reach the questions of: (i) whether the Officers are entitled to qualified immunity or … Reply 2–7. 6 Here too, because the excessive force claim fails, the Court need not reach the issues of qualified immunity or Monell liability. 7 On this

In Re Sumitomo Copper Litigation

995 F. Supp. 451 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 11, 1998

See 16 RICO L.Rep. 1, 79-93 (1992) (index showing disproportionate number of dismissals in civil RICO suits under Rule 9(b)); see also Michael Goldsmith, Judicial Immunity For White Collar Crime: The Ironic Demise of Civil … RICO clearly provides for civil remedies to benefit victims of racketeering, and in the absence of congressional action, these provisions should not be ignored. See 18 U.S.C. § 1964 (c); see also H.J. Inc. v.

Beecher v. Able

435 F. Supp. 397 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 16, 1977

In the court’s view, the weight of the evidence clearly establishes that the depreciation in the Douglas debentures was due to causes directly related to the falsity of the prospectus rather than the unrelated factors urged … With respect to those who never sold, clause (1) clearly limits the relevant considerations to the time of suit.

In re Nasdaq Market-Makers Antitrust Litigation

169 F.R.D. 493 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 26, 1996

Here, the class numbers at least a million members, and the numerosity requirement is clearly satisfied. Moreover, a class of this size plainly makes joinder of all members impracticable, if not impossible. … Likewise, nearly all the Defendants have raised primary jurisdiction and implied antitrust immunity as affirmative defenses in their answers to the Complaint.

International Multifoods Corp. v. Commercial Union Insurance

178 F. Supp. 2d 346 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 22, 2001

Thus, clauses 4, 5, 6 and 7 are not applicable to International Multifoods’ loss, and none, therefore, qualifies as an exception to the insuring agreement of the Commercial Union All-Risk policy. … Co., 98 F.Supp.2d 498 (S.D.N.Y.2000) (“Multifoods I”), I closely examined clause 6, and held that its terms clearly and unambiguously limited its exclusion to war-related risks.

Jalee Consulting Group, Inc. v. Xenoone, Inc.

908 F. Supp. 2d 387 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 29, 2012

Clearly, Plaintiffs “[unsupported statements ... do not meet the ‘heavy burden of proof required to set aside a forum-selection clause,” Effron, 67 F.3d at 11 , particularly given their conspiratorial nature. Cf. … AJW Qualified Partners, LLC, 83 A.D.3d 804, 806 , 921 N.Y.S.2d 260 (N.Y.App.Div. 2011). Defendants do not appear to contest that Plaintiff adequately pleaded the final three elements.

United States v. Rollack

90 F. Supp. 2d 263 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 20, 1999

are not immune from Fourth Amendment scrutiny. … This affidavit is insufficient to establish the substantial preliminary showing required to warrant a Franks hearing.

In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation

56 F. Supp. 3d 568 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 23, 2014

meaning that the issue may be dispositive as to certain defendants. 12 According to the Commonwealth, under Puerto Rican law, the answer to the question to be certified “need not determine the outcome of the entire case to qualify … Puerto Rico Land Authority, 21 the subject of two prior rounds of briefing by the parties, to demonstrate a clearly-established precedent of the Puerto Rico Supreme Court that the common law doctrine of nullum tempus ocurrit

Pirone v. Home Insurance

559 F. Supp. 306 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 1, 1983

Gant, 630 F.2d 60, 67 (2d Cir.1980), the ADEA does not require that an employer choose those whom the court considers most qualified, it requires only that the employer’s decision not be discriminatory. … The fact that entry level employees are uniformly younger than persons terminated clearly has no significance. Logic would seem to suggest that this would be the natural order of things. As was stated in Langesen v.

Jones Jr El

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 21, 2025

Adirondack Beverage Co., 141 F.3d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1998) (“[A]n action is ‘frivolous’ when either: (1) the factual contentions are clearly baseless . . . ; or (2) the claim is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory … Acknowledgement of jones, mike jr david a people called Moor beneficiary, as sole exclusive heir to the same subject matter the Name and Estate of “MIKE DAVID JONES JR,” “MIKE DAVID JONES JR EL” establishing

Kachalsky v. Cacace

817 F. Supp. 2d 235 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 2, 2011

Weber, 741 F.Supp.2d 993 (N.D.Iowa 2010), for example, adopted this view in considering a qualified immunity defense presented by a sheriff who denied concealed weapons permits to plaintiff applicants. … This clearly shows that the Heller Court considered concealed firearms prohibitions to be presumptively constitutional under the Second Amendment.”)

Fischman v. Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings America, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 11, 2019

Supp. 3d at 747 (stating that the party seeking to seal judicial documents has “the burden to establish, through competent evidence,” that disclosure “would cause . . . clearly defined and serious harm”). … Dep’t of Educ., 313 F.3d 768, 793 (2d Cir. 2002) (holding that a ruling on qualified immunity is “premature” where the defense “turns on factual questions”); Walker v.