Case law

Cocron v. Cocron

84 Misc. 2d 335 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1975

It is well established that a State Department’s suggestion that a foreign sovereign be granted immunity is conclusive upon the court (Mexico v Hoffman, 324 US 30, 35 ; Isbrandtsen Tankers, v President of India, 446 F2d 1198 … plaintiff is not domiciled in New York because of her nonimmigrant alien student status, which is defined as an "alien having a residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning, who is a bona fide student qualified

Shaw v. City of New York

165 Misc. 765 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1937

and to definitely limit the immunity granted *767 under the ruling in the Parsons case. … But when we view conditions in our city we find that New York city may establish standards independent of the State.

Subpoena to Sullivan v. Hurley

167 Misc. 2d 534 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1995

Sullivan are clearly relevant to the issues at hand, and therefore require a careful examination of the applicable laws to determine their disposition. … In 1975, the Legislature amended the statute by adding a provision which gave journalists immunity from disclosing sources of information in Grand Jury proceedings. (L 1975, ch 316, § 1.)

Freeze Right Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Services, Inc. v. City of New York

115 Misc. 2d 607 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 14, 1982

In the instant case, the New York Times and Ralph Blumenthal are clearly independent of the city and the department. They investigate, gather, and report news. … QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE Although absolute immunity is not available to defendants, liability for defamation may be avoided by invoking the doctrine of qualified privilege.

People v. Fine

173 Misc. 1010 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1940

There the court clearly referred to a plea of guilty as a conviction. We are aware of the language used by our Court of Appeals. In Matter of Rouss ( 221 N. … This motion to inspect the minutes is made for the purpose of using them on a motion or proceeding to establish the defendant’s immunity from sentence.

State Insurance Fund v. Hamblin

31 Misc. 2d 977 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 27, 1961

Property used primarily to obtain revenue or profit is not held for a public use and is not ordinarily immune from taxation, but property held by a State agency primarily for a public use does not lose immunity because the … Applying the court rule to the instant matter — the Fund’s status as a State agency having been conclusively established by the Boyland decision (supra) — the only question here is whether the rental of approximately 50%

General Mutual Insurance v. Coyle

207 Misc. 362 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1954

The State hospital claims that it is a State agency and as such is immune from action, except insofar as the State has given its consent. … It is clearly established that the State may waive its immunity upon such conditions as it may prescribe, but such waiver must be clearly expressed. (Litchfield v. Bond, 186 N. Y. 66 ; Smith v. State of New York, 227 N.

Rubens v. Ludgate Hill Steamship Co.

20 N.Y.S. 481 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1892

We cannot, however, agree with this statement, because we think it has been clearly established in this case that the bills of lading constituted the agreement between the parties. … Rep. 626, as follows: “The ruléis firmly established in this state that a common carrier may contract for immunity from its negligence or that of its agents, but that to accomplish that object the contract must be so expressed

Town of Poughkeepsie v. Hopper Plumbing & Heating Corp.

46 Misc. 2d 761 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1965

The undisputed facts as recited by the minority are now clearly established. … The Legislature clearly has given the Commissioner of Education and the school boards the power and the obligation to see that schools are properly constructed.

Cline v. Avery Abrasives, Inc.

96 Misc. 2d 258 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 25, 1978

The definition of employer is carefully qualified by the phrase "except when otherwise expressly stated”. … By performing safety inspections, Hartford is doing something clearly distinct from its contractual obligations to make payment of benefits under the insurance contract (Larson, Workmen’s Compensation Insurer as Suable Third

City of New York v. BusTop Shelters, Inc.

104 Misc. 2d 702 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1980

In any event, the burden of establishing such an exemption is upon the City. (Public Officers Law, § 89, subd 4, par [b]; Matter of Miracle Mile Assoc. v Yudelson, supra, p 179.) … such exemption, privilege or immunity.

Mantis v. United Cerebral Palsy Association of Nassau County, Inc.

173 Misc. 2d 778 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1997

Ctr., 202 AD2d 385 [hospital workers held to be immune from liability for reporting suspicion of child abuse based upon Social Services Law § 419]; Isabelle V. v City of New York, 150 AD2d 312 [same]). … In opposition, the plaintiffs have submitted no evidence, in admissible form, establishing a triable issue of fact with regard to any bad faith by UCP.

People v. Ackermann

44 Misc. 3d 626 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 18, 2014

With respect to counts 5 and 6, which charge defendant with offering a false instrument for filing in the first and second degrees, the evidence clearly established that the criminal complaint falls squarely within the definition … ’s immunized statement.

McCarthy v. City of Saratoga Springs

183 Misc. 802 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1944

Y. 798 ). *803 That municipalities have been immune from liability for the acts of their policemen in the discharge of a governmental function is too well established by the authorities in this State to require discussion … The courts will not extend or enlarge the liability by construction; they will not go beyond the clearly expressed provision of the act.’ (Sutherland Stat. Constr. § 371; Leppard v. O’Brien, 225 App.

Hamdan v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'n

116 Misc. 2d 706 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 19, 1982

“In light of the strong policy in favor of full disclosure unless the information sought is immunized, the burden of showing the appropriate immunity should be on the party asserting it”. … None of these interrogatories deals with any matter remotely qualifying as material prepared for litigation.

Silbowitz v. Lepper

55 Misc. 2d 443 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1967

There is no evidentiary proof of actual knowledge of falsity of the statement complained of to establish actual malice in fact. … The court recognizes utterances decreed immune from liability for libel retain their immunity when passed on to the press for publication (Gilberg v. Goffi, supra).

Diana G-D v. Bedford Central School District

33 Misc. 3d 970 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 21, 2011

Therefore, the Court found that caseworker was entitled to a qualified immunity from liability. … Notably, in order to lose this immunity a plaintiff must establish that the reporter’s acts were “willful misconduct or gross negligence.”

Leighton v. Roper

194 Misc. 893 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1948

Since the language of this statute clearly purports to authorize the prosecution of this action against the administrator of Mr. … The requirement of due process established by Pennoyer v.

Perkins v. Mitchell

31 Barb. 461 · New York Supreme Court · May 14, 1860

Clearly this action can be sustained only as an action for a libel, and we shall proceed to consider it as such. … In this case the opinions of some of the judges are somewhat 'qualified and hesitating, as if proof of express malice would take away the privilege.

Washington County Cease, Inc. v. Persico

120 Misc. 2d 207 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1983

Where a State law does not clearly express an intent to pre-empt local regulation or where State law expressly requires the State to comply with local regulations, no *216 immunity from local regulations is afforded the State … Pérsico is stricken and the Board determination invalidated for failure to have the required minimum of five qualified and competent Board members approve the Certificate. V.