Case law

Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

590 F. Supp. 1509 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 27, 1984

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. 620 F.2d at 348 . … The court recognized that municipal immunity from punitive damages was a broadly applied doctrine.

O'Hara v. Board of Cooperative Education Services, Southern Westchester

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 16, 2020

Analysis While the SAC does not clearly identify individual causes of action, Defendants raise arguments to address several causes of action that might be fairly … Court of Appeals of Maryland, 566 U.S. 30, 33–37 (2012) (holding that Congress lacked the authority to abrogate state sovereign immunity when it legislated certain provisions of the FMLA).

Vereins-Und Westbank, AG v. Carter

691 F. Supp. 704 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 14, 1988

established in Ultramares Corp. v. … Klat, supra n. 15, such a holding would clearly have set a precedent which would have seriously prejudiced subsequent lawyer-client relationships. Michalic involved a bitter and protracted custody battle.

Kearney v. A'Hearn

210 F. Supp. 10 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 26, 1962

Congress has established a means whereby unpaid taxes may be collected solely through administrative means. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 6201 , 6301. … Assuming plaintiffs asserted the “counterclaim” as an original action, no jurisdiction over such a claim would exist since Congress has not waived the government’s immunity from suit and such statutory consents must be narrowly

Mamiye Bros. v. Barber Steamship Lines, Inc.

241 F. Supp. 99 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 5, 1965

Gilmore and Black, cited above, seem to state clearly that under Cogsa the carrier has the burden of persuasion as to negligence in an act of God situation. … This thought is clearly expressed in Merchants Ice & Cold Storage Co. v.

Maharishi Hardy Blechman Ltd. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

292 F. Supp. 2d 535 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 8, 2003

The dragon images at issue here plainly do not qualify as “work[s] of visual art” under the statute. … Those sweater designs therefore fail to qualify for protection of trade dress inherent in product design.” 71 F.3d at 1009.

Helprin v. Harcourt, Inc.

277 F. Supp. 2d 327 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 13, 2003

The Court is not persuaded that the alleged breach is not significant enough to qualify for rescission. … Yet, the case Harcourt cites for this proposition clearly distinguishes between cases based upon a rescission of a voidable contract and cases where the remedy sought includes rescission. See E.T.C. Corp. v.

Natco Theatres, Inc. v. Ratner

463 F. Supp. 1124 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 5, 1979

Jan. 10, 1979), the instant ordinance clearly applies to the plaintiff, and, due to the nature of the movies plaintiff plans to offer, it is a likely target for enforcement. … Ill It has long been established that motion pictures are a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. Interstate Circuit, Inc. v.

Murray v. Board of Educ. of City of New York

984 F. Supp. 169 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 5, 1997

Failure to Promote To establish a prima facie case of hiring discrimination under Title VII, plaintiff must demonstrate that (i) she is a member of a protected class; (ii) she applied and was qualified for a job for which … In her Amended Complaint, however, plaintiff clearly alleges "constructive discharge”. Amended Complaint at 2.

Pressley v. Bennett

235 F. Supp. 2d 349 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 3, 2003

Thus, the federal court must decide “whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was objectively unreasonable,” not whether the application was simply incorrect. … The Court of Appeals decision thus could not have involved “an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Quadir v. NYS Department of Labor

District Court, S.D. New York · May 31, 2020

clearly ineffective.” Borkowski, 63 F.3d at 139. Setting aside his tardiness, Quadir missed over ninety days of work a year from April 2013 to April 2015. (SOF ¶¶ 8–9.) … Because Quadir’s proposal would eliminate an essential function of the role and the proposal is clearly ineffective, Quadir’s reasonable accommodation claims must be dismissed. C.

Matos v. United States

907 F. Supp. 2d 378 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 16, 2012

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, Matos must “(1) demonstrate that his counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness in light of prevailing professional norms, and (2) affirmatively … The fraud loss clearly exceeded $10,000. Accordingly, Matos’ argument that the loss amount should be modified to reflect an amount less than $10,000 is contrary to the plain facts surrounding his conviction.

Rudersdal, EOOD v. Harris

District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2020

Bulgarian National Bank Judge Lehrburger also correctly determined that BNB is immune to jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (the “FSIA”). … One exception to the immunity enjoyed by foreign sovereigns is the “commercial activity” exception. 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2).

Loekle v. Hansen

551 F. Supp. 74 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 4, 1982

Nowhere in the letter did Loekle state that a subsequent investigation by a postal inspector had failed to establish that a bag had been taken. … The case that defendants cite in which the punishment of a union member for failing to report was upheld is clearly distinguishable. In Ritz v.

On Track Innovations Ltd. v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.

106 F. Supp. 3d 369 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 3, 2015

The court qualified this in two ways. First, an industry standard may “not provide the level of specificity required to establish that practicing that standard would always result in infringement.” Id. … In lieu of an established rate set by prior licensing agreements, Dr.

Roman v. Abrams

608 F. Supp. 629 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 15, 1985

As such, each was immune from further peremptory challenges. It is clear from the context of the trial record that neither of these two jurors was white, and I so find. … Our preceding discussion of the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges in this case brings us clearly within the rule of McCray in both its aspects.

Pryce v. United States

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 8, 2022

The United States, through the FTCA, has effected a “limited waiver of sovereign immunity.” United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 813 (1976). … L. 104-73, 109 Stat. 777, the United States “deems” certain health centers that receive federal funding (known as “Federally Qualified Health Centers,” or “FQHCs”) to be employees of the Public Health Service. 42 U.S.C

Johnson v. IAC/Interactive Corp.

2 F. Supp. 3d 504 · District Court, S.D. New York · Feb 24, 2014

To establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under these statutes, the employee must “show that (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the position he held; (3) he suffered an adverse … The record evidence clearly and consistently supports defendants’ contention that plaintiffs poor performance — and not unlawful discrimination — prompted her termination.

Internet Law Library, Inc. v. Southridge Capital Management, LLC

223 F. Supp. 2d 474 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 17, 2002

In particular, the defendants argue that, since the written agreements between the parties clearly established that the $25 million equity line was not unconditional, in addition to allowing defendants to dispose of ITIS … participation in order to establish a prima facie case of control person liability.

American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company v. J.R. Contracting & Environmental Consulting, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 21, 2024

While addressing a number of Nelson’s premises and assumptions, Trezise maintains that “rate [at issue] was unmistakably and clearly stated and anyone familiar with basic arithmetic can understand how it determined the … The proponent of expert testimony must establish admissibility by a preponderance of the evidence. See Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 175-76 (1987).