Case law

Pepitone v. Pepitone

108 Misc. 2d 12 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1981

He is a qualified member of the Major League Baseball Players Benefit Plan (the Plan). … It is now clear, however, that ERISA does not operate to immunize pension payments from family support obligations.

People v. Andino

183 Misc. 2d 290 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 3, 2000

Of course, the prosecutor *292 may require any such defense witness to execute a waiver of immunity as a condition of testifying pursuant to CPL 190.45. (See, CPL 190.45 [4].) … However, despite the People’s assertions, the Grand Jury minutes clearly establish that the People never informed the Grand Jury of defendant’s request to present witnesses on her behalf.

People v. Bova

118 Misc. 2d 14 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1983

The word “confront”, however, when read in context with the preceding paragraph published in the article clearly refers to a verbal confrontation. … He offered to implicate other participants in the scheme in exchange for Federal immunity and Federal intervention concerning the State charges.

Cohen v. State

52 Misc. 2d 324 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 3, 1966

State legislation concerning education affecting only certain political subdivisions has been held immune from attack based upon geographical classification. … Young, J., in holding that a section of the Education Law which established town boards of education in all counties except Nassau was not an ureasonable classification, stated in Brown v.

Griffin v. Todd

14 N.Y.S. 351 · New York Supreme Court · May 11, 1891

The judge who saw the witnesses, and heard them testify, was better qualified to pass upon their credibility than an appellate court can be, merely from reading their testimony. … plaintiff; on the other hand, it clearly appeared that the defendant had greatly improved this highway, without detriment to any right of the plaintiff.

Ammirati v. Van Wicklen

16 Misc. 3d 952 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 11, 2007

The bases for establishing a claim of adverse possession are well settled. … While immunity will generally attach to property held in a “governmental” capacity, such as a highway, public stream, canal and public fairground, there is no immunity available for property held in a so-called “proprietary

Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization & Assessment

98 Misc. 2d 491 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1979

While the conclusion reached by this court leaves the equalization rate established by the State Board effectively immune to attack by the owner of a special franchise for incorrectness or inaccuracy, however great, the potential … It was there held that the State Board’s assessment of a special franchise is immune to attack by a municipality.

Chrysler Motors Corp. v. Schachner

138 Misc. 2d 501 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1988

The agreement herein was made after the effective date of the Lemon Law and is clearly within its *506 ambit. … The issue of whether respondent established the criteria necessary to qualify as a consumer under the Lemon Law was for the arbitrator to determine, and it cannot be said that his determination lacks a rational basis.

OSJ, Inc. v. Work

180 Misc. 2d 804 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1999

Defendant Work testified in exchange for immunity against prosecution in criminal proceedings against plaintiff Koen. … The State Legislature clearly recognized the problems presented by false identification as evidenced by their inclusion of such provisions in Alcoholic Beverage Control Law §§ 65 and 65-b.

Bill's Gay Nineties, Inc. v. Fisher

180 Misc. 721 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1943

language, and in newspapers, menus and various other devices clearly simulating petitioner’s. … The final ground of opposition rests on a construction placed on this statute, to the effect that in order to render it applicable it is requisite that a criminal intent on the part of the respondent be clearly established

In re Wilcox

153 Misc. 761 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1934

properly and without unlawful interference on the part of anyone. “ This Grand Jury expresses its regret that by reason of the peculiar existing conditions it was not possible to obtain sufficient evidence under the law to establish … The presentment is immune. It is like the ‘ hit and run ’ motorist. Before application can be made to suppress it, it is the subject of public gossip. The damage is done.

Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Public Service Commission

137 Misc. 2d 235 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1987

PURPA requires utilities to purchase electric energy from qualifying facilities. … "Avoided costs” are defined as "the incremental costs to an electric utility of electric energy or capacity or both which, but for the purchase from the qualifying facility or qualifying facilities, such utility would generate

Uzcategui v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.

96 Misc. 2d 868 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 3, 1978

Clearly, the purpose of disclosure is not to compel a party to disclose the array of witnesses whose identity and testimony do not have to be disclosed, or to require that they be "locked in” to use these experts. … This case hinges upon scientific opinions with respect to a product and the defendant will present its own expert witnesses that are qualified to judge the credentials and ability of plaintiff’s expert at that time.

Woods v. De Figaniere

16 Abb. Pr. 1 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1863

Clearly, it means any and every person, who, throughout its provisions, is described as a party to an action. … In a proceeding under section 394 of the Code, it cannot be necessary that the order of conviction should require the finding of more facts than under that section need be established to justify the imposition of the fine

In re 1,750 Cases of Liquor

166 Misc. 2d 739 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 8, 1995

Tribal Immunity The St. … New York Constitution, article V, § 3 clearly provides that it is a legislative function to assign powers and functions to various agencies subject only to explicit constitutional restrictions.

People ex rel. O'Brien v. French

4 N.Y.S. 330 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1889

In this conclusion I think he was clearly right. … The second statute contains no express words repealing the exemption established by the first; and the general rule, that repeals by implication are not favored, applies with peculiar force in the case of acts passed at the

Shawmut Engineering Co. v. Public Service Commission

135 Misc. 2d 345 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1987

PURPA requires utilities to purchase electric energy from qualifying facilities. … "Avoided costs” are defined as "the incremental costs to an *347 electric utility of electric energy or capacity or both which, but for the purchase from such qualifying facility or qualifying facilities, such utility would

People ex rel. Flaxman v. Hennessy

74 Misc. 166 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1911

subject-matter should be harmonized and effect given to all, so far as practicable; but the difficulty, if any, here is, that the right to damages for a change of" grade is given solely by section 951, and that section clearly … Statutes which are plain and explicit are not to be qualified by construction on the mere ground that the court deem the legislation unwise or indiscreet. Hyatt v. Taylor, 42 N.

Hacker v. City of New York

46 Misc. 2d 1003 · New York Supreme Court · May 26, 1965

City of New York , 6 A D 2d 30). “ The State and every political subdivision have unconditionally surrendered their sovereign immunity. … It cannot be gainsaid that in the performance of a police officer’s duty, the quick use of his firearm is clearly a possible necessity.

Marquez v. Presbyterian Hospital

159 Misc. 2d 617 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 2, 1994

The court need not resolve that question in this case since the guardian ad litem role clearly predominates here. … This role is clearly distinguished from that of "counsel” (Mental Hygiene Law § 81.10). .