Case law

Belair Care Ctr., Inc. v. Cool Insuring Agency, Inc.

New York Supreme Court · May 4, 2017

that plaintiffs allege in the 'conversion' cause of action is that [the broker] failed to use the quarterly payments paid by plaintiffs to purchase insurance from the insurers and its subsidiaries which, if true, would clearly … "Materials that clearly qualify as documentary evidence include documents reflecting out-of-court transactions such as mortgages, deeds, contracts, and any other papers, the contents of which are essentially undeniable" (

Vidal v. Maldonado

23 Misc. 3d 186 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 8, 2008

Defendants did not contest the “substantiality” of plaintiffs limitations, and thus, the only issue presented for review was “simply whether plaintiff offered sufficient objective medical evidence to establish a qualifying … Of course, neither the statute nor the decisions define and clearly distinguish a “great” impairment from a “slight” one, and thus we have another amorphous standard. .

Gomez-Jimenez v. New York Law School

36 Misc. 3d 230 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 21, 2012

First of all, as the court already discussed, the complaint clearly establishes that plaintiffs had access to publicly available information pertaining to the realities of the legal job market. … This is sufficient to clearly “inform [the] defendant^] with respect to the incidents complained of.”

UBS Securities LLC v. Highland Capital Management, L.P.

42 Misc. 3d 580 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 25, 2013

Opportunities Holding Company (SOHC) and Highland CDO Opportunity Master Fund, L.E (CDO Fund) (collectively the Fund counterparties) were parties, along with Highland Capital, to agreements, made with UBS in 2007, which established … The doctrine recognizes that injunctive relief may be available where the suit involves a claim to “a specific fund” which qualifies as “the subject of the ac *591 tion” pursuant to CPLR 6301.

Plant v. Harrison

36 Misc. 649 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1902

Hoadley told her contains no mention of change of residence, and all reference to the boarding question is qualified as having been made jocularly. Mrs. … Watkinson, supra, states the rule clearly, as applicable to the case at bar.

Sybron Can. Holdings, Inc. v. Niznick

New York Supreme Court · Mar 3, 2017

Stratton's provocative and clearly hostile behavior toward Dr. Niznick precipitated threats and complaints from Dr. … Niznick characterized Stratton as psychologically unstable, untrustworthy, and a "megalomaniac" who "was not qualified to be promoted to President." Dr.

Doctors Allergy Formula, LLC v. Valeant Pharms. Intl.

New York Supreme Court · May 12, 2023

He asserts defendant failed to ensure that all salespersons completed web-based training and a certification protocol which was a prerequisite for a salesperson to be qualified to promote and sell the allergy testing system … He states that the salespersons who attended the training also sold defendants' test for early detection of an immune system disorder and that two sales managers "were dismissive of and appeared threatened by the DAF System

CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Sultan

47 Misc. 3d 626 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 29, 2014

Due to the fact that plaintiff cannot show its right to foreclose, coupled with its inability to clearly establish a date of defendant’s default (see JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v RADS Group, Inc., 88 AD3d 766 [2d Dept 2011 … However, as noted above, the purpose of the good faith requirement is not dwelling-specific; whereas the purpose of the mandatory conferences in CPLR 3408 is clearly established through subdivision (a), confining its mandate

In re Stearns

23 Misc. 3d 447 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 4, 2008

While Morris opines that Bear Stearns’ stock may have been worth more than the $10 merger price, his own estimates are highly qualified and completely speculative. … The dispute between the experts is clearly one involving business judgment, which was within the board’s discretion to resolve.

Hayden v. Sugden

48 Misc. 108 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1905

The rule is established, as stated by Judge Gray in Henderson v. Henderson, 113 N. … As thus qualified, section 2 applies equally to the three children. It reads: “ In trust for all my children who shall attain the age of 25 years or marry under that age in equal shares.”

Coyne v. Town of Greenburgh

110 Misc. 598 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1920

The defense of the Statute of Limitations cannot prevail in this action because it is presumptively established that the contract was under seal and this presumption is not successfully controverted. … That is clearly indicated in People ex rel. Metropolitan St. R. Co. v. Tax Commissioners, *613 174 N.

Town of Irondequoit v. County of Monroe

158 Misc. 123 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 30, 1935

It is argued that this constitutes but an irregularity and that the bonds are made immune from successful defense by section 253 of the Town Law, as amended by chapter 712 of the Laws of 1926, which provides that “ All bonds … its right to continue this action to a final determination, is preserved, although the judgment to be entered herein must be so modified and limited as to conform with subdivisions (b) and (c) of the new act, these being clearly

People ex rel. Allen v. Allen

47 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 611 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1886

We do not, however, understand the court in this case to have gone to the extent of holding that it was the duty of the court to go back of the former •decree and try over and determine anew the facts established by that … The decision in that case, however, proceeded upon the theory that the children *620 being non-residents of the State the court had no jurisdiction over them and is clearly distinguishable in that regard.

In re Lacaille

44 Misc. 2d 370 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 21, 1964

Clearly, before the petitioner obtained a judgment, she remained a general creditor and she would have been *384 defeated by the State’s prior common-law right. … Y. 554 , supra), this right is qualified, in that it does not obtain against a lien which arose before the State ever attempted to enforce that right.

Root v. Stuyvesant

18 Wend. 138 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1837

The point is clearly settled otherwise. In Hockley v.Waresbey, (1 Vesey, jun., 150,) the devise was “ to R. … Justice Story, speaking of real estate, “the doctrine of. the .common law. is clearly established, that fh.e law of the place where the property is locally situate, is to govern,” (Story’s Confl. of Laws, 398, § 474.)

National Park Bank v. Ninth National Bank

7 Abb. Pr. 120 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1869

The rule claimed by the defendants has never been established by decisions in this State, although assumed to be the law by dicta in several cases. IY. … That he has made an admission which is clearly inconsistent with the evidence he proposes to give ; 2. That the other party has acted upon the admission ; and 3.

Long Island Railroad v. Department of Labor

138 Misc. 612 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1931

A separation of grades of railroads and highways has become an established policy throughout the United States. … The tables which have been prepared show clearly the types of accidents which have occurred. * * * “ Complete ehmination seems to be the only positive remedy, but this will cost a prodigious sum.

In re Clinton Street Police Station Site

123 N.Y.S. 198 · New York Supreme Court · May 24, 1910

Erom what has been said it clearly appears.that the cláimants acquired an easement of light, air, and access over such fire protecting space, subject, of course, to the right of the city to maintain it at all times as a fire … or intend to establish values.

People v. Weinstein

156 Misc. 2d 34 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 8, 1992

results were peer reviewed prior to their publication, a psychiatrist would be reasonable in considering the results of the SCR tests as a form of corroboration of other, more definitive tests, namely PET and MRI, that clearly … psychia *46 trist may rely on material, albeit of out-of-court origin, if it is of a kind accepted in the profession as reliable in forming a professional opinion * * * He may also rely on material, which if it does not qualify

R & D Maidman Family L.P. v. Scottsdale Insurance

4 Misc. 3d 728 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2004

notwithstanding the parties’ arguments as to whether the costs herein are “damages” or “property damage,” or the result of an “occurrence,” the court concludes that it must first determine that the loss incurred by plaintiffs qualifies … In Aaron , the insured was allegedly under a contractual obligation to repair his property to prevent further damage to third-party property, which clearly does not exist here.