Case law

Barclays Capital Inc. v. Shen

20 Misc. 3d 319 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 22, 2008

The petition and cross motion before the court focus on whether the NASD arbitration panel’s award of punitive damages to Shen was rendered in “manifest disregard of the law,” as the law was recently established in the Court … Shen made this point clearly in her own statement of claim. The arbitrators were bound to, and this court must, conclude they did rule only on matters presented to them by the parties.

Valentin v. Simon

98 Misc. 2d 5 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1979

This point, although not clearly reflected in the opinion, was not in dispute as evidenced by the record itself. … The Legislature amended subdivision 5 of section 64 of the Town Law to provide that "[a] person, otherwise qualified, who is a member of the town board at the time the vacancy occurs may be appointed [by the town board] to

Smith v. New York Central Rail Road

29 Barb. 132 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 7, 1859

If the permit had been intended to exempt the defendants from the consequences of their own negligence, which the law fixes upon them, such intention ought to have been clearly and unequivocally expressed, so as to leave … It is enough, however, to say that the facts of that case withdraw it from the operation of the rule established in the case at bar.

Pratt v. Tofany

66 Misc. 2d 172 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1971

According to the standards discernible in these precedents, clearly the “ disproportionate ratio ” of accidents in Nassau County involving junior operators, as set forth in Senator Speno’s letter to the Governor, has the … In this court’s view the considerations upon which this statute was predicated are now equally pertinent to other areas of the State and to drivers other than those who qualify for junior licenses in Nassau.

Bartlett v. Sutorius

2 Silv. Sup. 23 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1889

In subdivision 2 of section 549 of the Code, the words “in a fiduciary capacity,” qualify the factor, agent, broker, or other person, therein specified. Decatur v. Goodrich, 44 Hun, 3 . … did not allege that the broker acted in a fiduciary capacity, nor was there alleged any violation of trust or wrongdoing, beyond the statement of the non-payment of moneys received as agent, and the court held that it was clearly

Apfelbaum v. Town of Clarkstown

104 Misc. 2d 371 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1980

Considering the plaintiffs’ burden of proving unconstitutionality, the presumption of validity of the zoning ordinance and plaintiffs’ additional burden of establishing that there are no triable issues of fact, the court … Clearly, this is an issue which requires further development upon the trial of this action.

Gallin v. National City Bank

155 Misc. 880 · New York Supreme Court · May 25, 1935

The executives who participated in the management fund constituted the best qualified men obtainable for the purposes for which they were selected in the principal lines of business and industry in the United States and in … This evidence clearly indicates that the elimination was duly authorized, was proper, and removes it from the group of items claimed by plaintiffs to be unauthorized eliminations.

Van Schaick v. Aron

170 Misc. 520 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 5, 1938

Nor are the transactions complained of within the letter of the qualifying sentence. … None of these defendants testified at the trial and the record clearly establishes that they knew of, approved and consummated the transactions sued upon.

Hamill v. Melton

98 Misc. 2d 334 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1979

New York courts clearly require petitioner to exhaust his administrative remedies before pursuing relief in court through an article 78 proceeding; see, e.g., Young Men’s Christian Assn. v Rochester Pure Waters Dist. ( 37 … establish improvement in his health so that he will be employable in a Retirement and Social Security Law (§ 74, subd d) hearing.

Landmark West! v. City of New York

9 Misc. 3d 563 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 1, 2005

The building does not qualify as a natural resource. Against the backdrop of the public trust doctrine, a similar concept has evolved. … G & W, the donor, clearly intended the reverter as security—to make sure that the City continued using the property as promised.

Kiersted v. Orange & Alexandria Railroad

3 Thomp. & Cook 662 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1874

How long he occupied them does not appear clearly from the evidence given by him. … Upon those facts being established and found, no reason now appears why the defendants should not be held liable.

People ex rel. Wade v. Strack

3 Thomp. & Cook 165 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1874

The section containing these provisions supersedes section 9 of the charter of Í 870, and is clearly applicable to the boards existing at the time of its passage, except wherein restricted by its own or some subsequent provisions … term his office was vacant by lapse of time, and that, until his successor was chosen, he was discharging its duties by force of the general statute, which provides for such discharge “until his successor should be duly qualified

People v. Province

47 Misc. 3d 286 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 8, 2015

That statute requires, as a precondition to federal habeas corpus relief from the state court conviction, a showing that the state court ruling “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established … Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” ( 28 USC § 2254 [d] [1]; see Williams v Taylor, 529 US 362, 382 [2000] [rule that is not derived from clearly established law as determined by the United

Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. v. Board of Assessors

3 Misc. 2d 339 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1955

The case at bar is clearly distinguishable by reason of the fact that this petitioner has no equitable ownership, nor even an absolute right to acquire ownership under an agreement of sale, but merely a right of first refusal … Supp. 641 ), it was held that Government owned property (in the State of New York) to the full extent of the Government’s interest therein, is immune from taxation, either as against the Government itself or as against one

George F. Weaver Sons Co. v. City of Utica

196 Misc. 634 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 27, 1949

Prior to the commencement of this action, the municipal housing authority was established to provide low rent facilities for certain qualified residents of the city of Utica. … This quoted paragraph clearly indicates not only that the housing authority of the city of Utica would be free of any expense in reference to the construction and maintenance of such streets but also that the city itself

People v. Fox

178 Misc. 2d 1018 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1998

Thus, the prosecutor was entitled to utilize leading questions to control the witness’ testimony and avoid the danger of conferring immunity. (See, CPL 190.40.) … Clearly, the fact that an informant has previously provided information on other defendants and received a benefit for his cooperation is relevant to the question of whether an agency relationship has been established.

Snyder v. Guider

17 Misc. 2d 558 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1959

Clearly, this sum of $1,177.37 cannot be applied to the purchase price nunc pro tunc. The retaking took place on December 3, 1956, by which time less than one half of the purchase price had been paid. … Under no theory *563 in law or equity may such sum be deemed a part payment of the purchase price as of December 3, 1956, in order to qualify the plaintiff for greater rights under the Uniform Conditional Sales Law.

People ex rel. Bear Mountain Hudson River Bridge Co. v. Diamond

126 Misc. 239 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1925

These and other expressions in the act clearly indicate the intention of the Legislature to grant to the relator the right and duty to build, maintain and operate the bridge and collect tolls from the public for a period … This right of way, the right to build and maintain a bridge over the river, and the right to levy tolls, with their incidental and implied powers and privileges, constituted the entire franchise and qualified property of

Lawrence Investing Co. v. Board of Review

86 Misc. 642 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 9, 1976

Clearly, this constituted the justification required by the language of Judge Gabrielli. … the appellate decisions in Guth, makes it immediately apparent that while the Appellate Division, Third Department, gave blanket approval to the use of the State rate for the year 1970 and thereafter, the Court of Appeals qualified

Vertiv, Inc. v. Naithani

New York Supreme Court · Jun 6, 2023

Under the contract, plaintiff was required to "[a]ssign only qualified, legally authorized Supplier Representatives to provide the Services" ( id. , ¶ 27). … "On a motion for [*2]leave to amend, [the movant] need not establish the merit of its proposed new allegations, but must simply show that the proffered amendment is not palpably insufficient or clearly devoid of merit" (