Case law

Rodriguez v. Winski

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 12, 2020

Under the organizational standing theory, “an association may have standing in its own right to seek judicial relief to itself and to vindicate whatever rights and immunities the association … Standing As previously discussed, under the associational standing theory, “an association has standing to bring suit on behalf of its members” under qualifying

Stadt v. Fox News Network LLC

719 F. Supp. 2d 312 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 22, 2010

qualitatively different, we look at “what [the] plaintiff seeks to protect, the *318 theories in which the matter is thought to be protected and the rights sought to be enforced.” 30 The court takes a “restrictive view” of what qualifies … Unjust Enrichment In alleging that Fox was unjustly enriched through its unauthorized use of the Video, Stadt seeks to vindicate a right clearly within the general scope of the Copyright Act — namely, the exclusive right

Vangas v. Montefiore Medical Center

6 F. Supp. 3d 400 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 20, 2014

Van-gas’ termination — a COBRA-qualifying event — by MMC, and sent a notice to Mrs. Vangas via first class mail on September 28, 2010. Reice Deck, Ex. U (Bentley Dep. Tr.) at 13:10-24, 54:4-55:3. … It is well-established that a party cannot assert an argument for the first time in a reply brief; thus, the Court has not considered the merits of this assertion. See, e.g., Evangelista v.

Herman v. New York Metro Area Postal Union

30 F. Supp. 2d 636 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 16, 1998

They must contain specific standards of eligibility by which any member can determine in advance whether or not he is qualified to be a candidate. … Failure to specify a deadline does not clearly imply a strict application of a different deadline, however.

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.

Weston v. Capra

District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 25, 2022

“[I]t is a well-established principle of federalism that a state decision resting on an adequate foundation of state substantive law is immune from review in the federal courts.” Wainwright v. … However, there is no error in Judge McCarthy’s finding that the Appellate Division’s decision with regard to this claim was not “contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.”

Keller Foundations, LLC v. Zurich American Insurance Co.

252 F. Supp. 3d 319 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 4, 2017

It alleges that Diaz’s claim against Zurich was outside the scope of the Policy’s coverage, because Diaz did not qualify as an additional insured under the Policy and because Diaz’s claims against Zurich did not arise out … Without more clearly pled facts, the Court cannot determine whether Zurich in fact has raised its premiums as a result of its decision to settle with Diaz, and if so, whether that action is plausibly pled to have breached

Alston v. Microsoft Corp.

851 F. Supp. 2d 725 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 2012

Plaintiff Cannot Establish that Microsoft’s Reasons for Terminating Him were Pretext for Discrimination For the purposes of this motion, the Court assumes that Alston has established prima facie cases for Title VII and ADA … Microsoft’s April 1, 2004 letter clearly instructed plaintiff to advise Microsoft if he intended to submit to independent medical evaluations. (Ex. A to McDade Decl.) Plaintiff failed to respond in any way.

McGuire v. Heckler

589 F. Supp. 718 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 9, 1984

As our Court of Appeals has recently noted: The ... cases [in this Circuit] establish a sequence, and in effect posit an analytical framework, which the AU should follow. … McGuire clearly explained that the fact that her disease was “controlled” signified only that her condition had not worsened. She contended her treatment would not cure her disorder.

Pacific Life Insurance Company v. The Bank of New York Mellon

District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 15, 2021

“It is well- established that the trial judge has broad discretion in the matter of the admission or exclusion of expert evidence[.]” Boucher v. U.S. … “[T]he proponent of expert testimony has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the admissibility requirements of Rule 702 are satisfied[.]” United States v.

Salvani v. ADVFN PLC

50 F. Supp. 3d 459 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 23, 2014

However, In-vestorsHub is not obligated by its Terms of Service to remove any content that does not comply with the Terms or other rules of conduct for the site, or that is “otherwise harmful, objectionable, or inaccurate, or clearly … The party asserting subject matter jurisdiction carries the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that jurisdiction exists. Morrison v.

Harewood-Bey v. Biden

District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 19, 2022

Plaintiff’s claims against these defendants are foreclosed by absolute presidential and judicial immunity. … I have established a PACER account; 3.

Dames v. Pigott

District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 26, 2019

Section 1983 does not establish substantive rights, but it provides a means of redress for the deprivation of rights established elsewhere. Id. … NYC H&H therefore qualifies as a “municipal corporation,” whose liability under § 1983 is governed by the principles set forth in Monell. Id. (citing Rookard v. Health & Hosps.

Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport v. Spirits International B.V.

61 F. Supp. 3d 372 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 24, 2014

FTE is the exclusive holder of the trademarks pursuant to Decree 69 and the Assignment, qualifying as an “assign” under the Lan-ham Act, and has standing. … I am somewhat uncomfortable telling a foreign government that a validly enacted decree cannot achieve the result that was clearly intended by its passage.

Roselink Investors, L.L.C. v. Shenkman

386 F. Supp. 2d 209 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 19, 2004

Certainly, paying a debt owed by Crown Books in an attempt to avoid bankruptcy qualifies as “general corporate purposes.” … The Court held that the plaintiffs’ fraud claim clearly arose out of or was related to their investment, which was governed by the subscription note containing the forum selection clause, and thus the forum selection clause

Sookul v. Fresh Clean Threads, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 16, 2024

Aug. 31, 2017) (“All but one of the listed exemplars [in Section 12181(7)] clearly reference physical locations . . . … Establishment 1.d, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/establishment (emphasis added).

Bury

District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 23, 2026

Defendant admits that it is subject to the ADA and that Plaintiff had a qualifying disability. (Def. Br. at 17). … Here, the undisputed evidence clearly shows that Plaintiff, not Consumer Reports, was responsible for the breakdown of the interactive process.

Great Lakes Carbon Corp. v. Koch Industries, Inc.

497 F. Supp. 462 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 18, 1980

The evidence clearly indicates to the Court that Mr. … Where the knowledge does not qualify for protection as a trade secret and there has been no conspiracy or breach of trust resulting in commercial piracy we see no reason to inhibit the employee’s ability to realize his potential

United States v. Matos

781 F. Supp. 273 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 30, 1991

Moreover, Matos has failed to establish that he could not with due diligence have discovered this evidence prior to trial. … The direct contradiction between these statements and his present affidavit clearly demonstrates that he was either lying then or that he is lying now.

Neilan v. Value Vacations, Inc.

603 F. Supp. 1227 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 8, 1985

According to the FAA, this regulatory scheme was established “in order to protect travelers and shippers by aircraft operated by (charter operators).” 49 U.S.C. § 1371 (n)(2). … However, Monell in no way qualified Aldinger's holding that the within jurisdictional questions are “statutory as well as constitutional.” Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v.