Case law

Yeadon v. New York City Transit Authority

719 F. Supp. 204 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 4, 1989

Plaintiffs have properly stated § 1985 and § 1986 claims, which may not be dismissed at this stage on the basis of defendants’ qualified immunity or their intracorporate relationship. … The right of access to the courts, free from racially motivated interference, having been well established at the time of defendants’ alleged conspiracy, defendants may not invoke qualified immunity at this time.

Standard Investment Chartered, Inc. v. National Ass'n of Securities Dealers, Inc.

621 F. Supp. 2d 55 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 26, 2007

The burden of establishing good cause lies with the party seeking the protective order. 8 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. … Dealers, Inc., 386 F.Supp.2d 402 , 404 (S.D.N.Y.2005) (analyzing absolute immunity defense using Rule 12(b)(6)), aff'd 218 Fed.Appx. 46 (2d Cir.2007).

Zucker v. Sable

72 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 11, 1975

It is also clear that materials assembled during routine investigations by counsel do not receive the qualified immunity afforded an attorney’s “work product” by Rule 26(b)(3). United States v. … San Corp., 291 F.Supp. 247, 250 (E.D.Pa.1968). 2 Therefore, the documents in question which were not originated by counsel in the preparation of his case are not immune from discovery.

United States Ex Rel. Graber v. City of New York

8 F. Supp. 2d 343 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jun 12, 1998

Thus, the critical issue on the City Defendants’ motion is whether Gongress has clearly signalled its intent to abrogate this policy-based immunity and thereby expose municipalities to the exemplary remedies mandated by the … Thus, .the statute does not clearly provide that states and municipalities are covered by § 3729.

Wintz v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

551 F. Supp. 1323 · District Court, S.D. New York · Nov 30, 1982

of the privileges and immunities under the law, (4) that the conspirators committed some act in furtherance of the conspiracy, and (5) that the plaintiffs were injured. … In addition, Jordan specified no job for which he was qualified that was given to an equally or less qualified non-minority candidate.

Grandison v. United States Postal Service

696 F. Supp. 891 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 5, 1988

Title VII and the ADEA for alleged discrimination based on his race, national origin, age and religion by the United States Postal Service in failing to promote him to a position for which he asserts he was more or equally qualified … The court decided that “[a]n action against the Postal Service, although ‘an independent establishment of the executive branch of the [federal government],’ 39 U.S.C. § 201 , is an action against the federal government for

City Chemical Corporation v. Shreffler

333 F. Supp. 46 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 28, 1971

Governmental immunity from suit is, thus, specifically waived with respect to the Walsh-Healy Act (Act of June 30, 1936, c. 881; 49 Stat. 2036 ; 41 U.S.C. §§ 35-45 ). … Without a statutory grant the doctrine of sovereign immunity would have precluded suit.

Fisk v. Letterman

501 F. Supp. 2d 505 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 14, 2007

In any case, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “[g]overnment actors performing discretionary functions are ‘shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Floyd v. City of New York

813 F. Supp. 2d 417 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 31, 2011

Qualified Immunity Government officials performing discretionary functions are generally granted qualified immunity and are immune from suit provided that “ ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … .” 220 “[T]he ‘objectively reasonable’ inquiry is part of the ‘clearly established’ inquiry.” 221 “[Sjummary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is not appropriate when there are facts in dispute that are material to a

Harrison v. Sobol

705 F. Supp. 870 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 8, 1988

Immunity Commissioner Sobol has moved to dismiss the claim against him in its entirety, claiming immunity from suit in his official capacity. … The Commissioner is not protected from liability by legislative, judicial, or qualified immunity. The District is also liable for damages under Monell v.

Franza v. Stanford

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

Qualified Immunity “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … We need not reach this issue, however, as Kiley is clearly shielded by qualified immunity as well.

Verlinden B v. v. Central Bank of Nigeria

488 F. Supp. 1284 · District Court, S.D. New York · Apr 21, 1980

Clearly there are instances in which aliens may sue foreign instrumentalities in the state courts. 39 If the defendant’s view of the Immunities Act were adopted, and aliens were barred from suing aliens in the federal courts … When Central Bank established the credit, Morgan advised plaintiff and its Dutch bank of that fact.

Thomas v. City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York · Jan 5, 2023

Defendants “are entitled to qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.” District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. … For the foregoing reasons, Penner’s actions, as she described them, did not violate clearly established law and she is entitled to qualified immunity.

United States v. JB Williams Company, Inc.

402 F. Supp. 796 · District Court, S.D. New York · Oct 23, 1975

However, the documents in subcategories e and f of Category One are clearly postdecisional. … Such testimony could not qualify as evidence ; and to use it for impeachment or corroborative purposes would make the attorney much less an officer of the court and much more an ordinary witness.” (Hickman v.

PGMedia, Inc. v. Network Solutions, Inc.

51 F. Supp. 2d 389 · District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 16, 1999

To oversee policy for determining, based on objective criteria clearly established in the new organization’s charter, the circumstances under which new top-level domains are added to the root system; and 4. … This is so because private parties acting in compliance with a clearly articulated government program are immune from such liability.”

Citizens Union of New York v. Attorney General of New York

269 F. Supp. 3d 124 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 1, 2017

Thus, while this case clearly involves serious First Amendment claims, the third Rodriguez factor does not tip in favor of disclosure. … The party seeking to invoke the privilege bears the burden of establishing its applicability.

United States v. Buck

690 F. Supp. 1291 · District Court, S.D. New York · Jul 6, 1988

In other words, recognition by the executive branch — not to be second guessed by the judiciary — is essential to establishing diplomatic status.” 741 F.2d at 15. … present in a claim of diplomatic immunity.

Aerotrade, Inc. v. Republic of Haiti

376 F. Supp. 1281 · District Court, S.D. New York · May 24, 1974

Throughout the letter there are descriptions of material delivered and to be delivered which clearly are for armed forces, including naval patrol boats, weapons, pistols, revolvers, grenades, machine guns, cannons, armored … Once that fact is established it is largely irrelevant how the equipment was used after its delivery.

Decor by Nikkei International, Inc. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria

497 F. Supp. 893 · District Court, S.D. New York · Aug 18, 1980

It appears the qualifying words “not exceeding” had been originally included in Chenax’s contract but were intentionally stricken therefrom with the consent of Nigeria and Chenax. … Indeed, these acts clearly demonstrate Nigeria’s intent to terminate its performance under these contracts.

Baez v. New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance

District Court, S.D. New York · Mar 28, 2025

“Qualified immunity was created to shield government officials from civil liability for the performance of discretionary functions so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … qualified immunity).