Case law

Klein v. Deer Park Union Free School District

110 Misc. 2d 332 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1981

Thus, the earlier test established by the Commissioner of Education in his decisions does afford some guidance. … The petitioner has clearly met that burden.

Halliday v. McDougall

20 Wend. 81 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1838

Clearly, this is so as to the presentment and refusal. Id. … The question, therefore, is, whether a partnership can be established by general reputation alone.

Morss v. Gleason

4 Thomp. & Cook 274 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1874

Morss, one of the defendants, was the real party for whose benefit and under whose direction the action was prosecuted, which was matter of defense to he established by proof. … Doubtless one member of a firm may become a creditor of the firm—certainly he may in a qualified sense.

Orange County Publications, Inc. v. County of Orange

168 Misc. 2d 346 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1995

Initially, it cannot be overlooked that "[n]ot every manifestation of a lawyer’s labors enjoys the absolute immunity of work product” (Hoffman v Ro-San Manor, 73 AD2d 207, 211 [1st Dept 1980]). … Indeed, "the burden of establishing a blanket exemption covering all of the records requested is especially heavy”.

Wynhamer v. People

20 Barb. 567 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 3, 1855

The right on the contrary is limited to certain persons, and qualified by the status of the property. … the instrument, would be clearly and peremptorily expressed.

Orellana v. Macy's Retail Holdings, Inc.

53 Misc. 3d 622 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 27, 2016

The issue is not whether or not Macy’s can demand civil penalties from suspected shoplifters; a mercantile establishment is clearly empowered to do so under the statute. … presented in plaintiff’s papers, plaintiff alleges, and it appears that Macy’s, a private actor acting under color of a state statute, may be depriving individuals suspected of shoplifting of their rights, privileges and immunities

Horn Construction Co. v. Town of Hempstead

41 Misc. 2d 438 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1963

Comparative aerial photographs m evidence clearly show that the pattern of development adjacent to the Cow Meadow property is predominantly residential, on reclaimed tidal marsh land. … Although this may be considered as a praiseworthy objective, “it cannot be accomplished by immunizing the constitutionally protected property of others against any reasonable use in the foreseeable future or at the complete

Andrasko v. Board of Trustees of Hamburg

169 Misc. 2d 1047 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 4, 1996

In what appears to be a case of first impression, this court is asked to determine if the Trustees of the Village of Hamburg qualify as a "board” within the meaning of section 7-712-c of the Village Law. … Clearly, this larger statute is directed at boards of appeals and we would be twisting the clear focus of this statute by extracting the word "boards” and extrapolating a 30 day limit on review of a legislative act where

Herald Co. v. Feurstein

3 Misc. 3d 885 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 23, 2004

Clearly, the Oneidas are not a party to this action. Although their interests are certainly affected by this litigation, the Oneidas have chosen not to participate. … IGRA establishes a comprehensive federal statutory scheme for the regulation of tribal gaming activities (see 25 USC § 2701 [4]; § 2702 [1] [2]).

Plimpton v. Bigelow

36 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 362 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1883

There was clearly no substantial difference upon which the owner of such shares could claim immunity. … When that may be done it was clearly the intention of the law that such shares might be effectively levied upon by means of the attachment.

Victor Radio Corp. v. Radio-Victor Corp. of America

140 Misc. 198 · New York Supreme Court · May 20, 1931

The defendant corporation qualified on May 27,1929, to do business íb the State of New York. … A number of authorities submitted by the defendant clearly illustrate that the courts have extended the protection of a trade name to cases where there was little or no similarity or kinship in respective products.

New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics v. Campaign for One New York, Inc.

53 Misc. 3d 983 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 8, 2016

Campaign has not established that any of the documents it seeks to protect are privileged. … Consonant with Myer- *1000 son, the First Department reasoned that, when “a subpoena is issued after extensive examination of witnesses and documents,” the agency issuing the subpoena should “establish clearly the reasonable

In re the election of Directors of the Mohawk & Hudson Railroad

19 Wend. 135 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1838

The Bank United States was not named ; and. clearly,' if the trust do not appear distinctly, it cannot be recognized. The trust is a matter between Mr. … But if this were otherwise, the proof utterly fails to establish the custom contended for. Again : the power of attorney to Mr.

New York Bus Tours, Inc. v. City of New York

111 Misc. 2d 10 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1981

Plaintiffs have sufficiently established that said selective imposition of this tax is intentional. … There exists under the facts heretofore established a cause of action for damages pursuant to the Federal statute.

In re D'Alessio

155 Misc. 2d 518 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1992

The attorney/client privilege was not found to render such information immune from disclosure. … Vogelstein was similar to the case before this court because the attorney clearly feared that his client would be prosecuted if his identity was revealed.

Harran Transportation Co. v. Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 2

71 Misc. 2d 139 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 25, 1972

Yet, neither that paragraph nor any other states that this requirement must be met or established when the award is made and therefore the board did not have to know this information before awarding the contract. … The data required are clearly vital and material. (Matter of Gottfried Baking Co. v. Allen, 45 Misc 2d 708 .)

Birdsall v. Phillips

17 Wend. 464 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1837

On the trial, the claim of the plaintiff below (as this court thought from the evidence) was established to be that of a mortgage, against the defendant as mortgagor. … As the jury were most clearly right in disregarding the lease for life, there remains no foundation for any of the other points.

Hurst v. Titus

99 Misc. 2d 205 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1979

"In abolishing the immunity defense, Gelbman allows suits between parents and children which would previously have been actionable between the parties absent the family relationship.” … In this case the well-established rule under Dole v Dow Chem. Co. ( 30 NY2d 143 ) precludes the counterclaim unless we also recognize the existence of a cause of action by the child against the parent.”

P. & A. Carting Co. v. City of New York

7 Misc. 2d 815 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 2, 1956

Their recommendation was that the city treat all commercial establishments alike and discontinue its free service to commercial establishments located in residential buildings. … Div. 345 ) cited by plaintiffs, is clearly distinguishable on several counts.

Colonial Motor Coach Corp. v. Cayuga Omnibus Corp.

137 Misc. 199 · New York Supreme Court · May 10, 1930

Gaiser, 109 Misc. 45 ): “ The legislature has clearly recognized the necessity of vesting in the public service commission authority to pass upon the question as to the convenience of and necessity for such competing lines … The question remains, is the plaintiff corporation in a position to Seek the aid of this court in equity to stop the illegal omnibus operation by the defendant until it shall have qualified under the statute?