Case law

Empire City Subway Co. v. Broadway & S. A. Railroad

33 N.Y.S. 1055 · New York Supreme Court · May 17, 1895

Woodruff v. Paddock, 130 N. Y. 618 , 29 N. E. 1021 ; Smith v. Lockwood, 13 Barb. 209 . … But, apart from the question of authority, it is manifest that the authorities of the city and the board of railroad commissioners did not grant or intend to grant to this plaintiff an exclusive right to construct, maintain

Crommelin v. Finn

129 Misc. 252 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 9, 1927

(May v. Traphagen, supra; People v. Hagadorn, 104 N. Y. 516 ; People v. Inman, 197 id. 200; People v. Ladew, 237 id. 413.) In May v. … In People v.

Katz v. Assessor

131 Misc. 2d 552 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1986

Petitioner believed that the Town of Southampton should have used the residential assessment ratio (5.49%) promulgated by the State Board (see, Real Property Tax Law § 738). … He utilized the State Board’s equalization rate of 9.99% and when multiplied by the fair market value ($1,250,000) determined that the indicated assessed value should be $124,875.

Euclid Candy Co. of New York, Inc. v. Summa

174 Misc. 19 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1940

There was a labor dispute prior to the certification by the National Labor Relations Board. … Oberman & Co., Inc., v. United Garment Workers of America, 21 F. Supp. 20 ; Union Premier Food Stores, Inc., v. Retail Food Clerks and Managers Union, Local No. 1357, 98 F. [2d] 821; Stalban v.

In re Broderick for a Peremptory Writ of Mandamus Directed to Easton

25 Misc. 534 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1898

Hewlett v. Wood, 67 N. Y. 394 at 399 ; Snebley v. Conner, 78 id. 218; Clarke v. Lourie, 82 id. 580; Koehler v. Hughes, 148 id. 507; Randall v. N. Y. El. R. R. Co., 149 id. 211. … a majority of the board of trustees, for they alone do not constitute the board.

McKenna v. Power

24 Misc. 2d 65 · New York Supreme Court · May 17, 1956

It is evident from the petition that by reason of limitation of time this proceeding was commenced prior to the final determination by the Board of Elections, in anticipation of an ultimate adverse decision by the Board of … With respect to the Fifteenth Election District, the address of Mary V. Simendinger, candidate for County Committee, was incorrectly typed on the top of the sheet as “ 42 — 41 248th St., Little Neck.”

Cummings v. Regan

76 Misc. 2d 357 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1973

Johnson v. Chairman, N. Y. State Bd. of Parole, 363 F. Supp. 416 ; Smartt v. Avery, 370 F. 2d 788 ). … Bey v. Connecticut State Bd. of Parole, 443 F. 2d 1079, 1085, 1086 ; Monks v. New Jersey State Parole Bd., 58 N. J. 238). The court in United States ex rel. Johnson v. Chairman, N. Y.

Hulis v. M. Foschi & Sons

123 Misc. 2d 567 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1984

“With respect to a board determination that a particular injury was or was not sustained in the course of employment, the judicial appellate function is limited * * * It is the rare case in which board findings are set aside … (Matter of Coe v House Inside, 29 NY2d 241, 244 )” (see, also, Kimbrough v CFL Dev. Corp., 80 AD2d 737 ). *571 Plaintiff’s second argument against summary judgment, while quite ingenuous, is not really on point.

Grumet v. Cuomo

164 Misc. 2d 644 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1995

(Everson v Board of Educ., 330 US 1 .) … See, Board of Educ. v Grumet, 512 US —, 114 S Ct 2481 ; Grumet v Board of Educ., 81 NY2d 518 ; Board of Educ. v Wieder, 72 NY2d 174 .

Young v. Shuart

67 Misc. 2d 689 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1971

Goldberg v. Kelly ( 397 U. S. 254, 264 ); Kaplan v. Nassau County Dept. of Social Serv. (34 A D 2d 575); Matter of Borders v. Nassau County Dept. of Social Serv. (34 A D 2d 805); Summers v. … Matter of Yakkey v.

People ex rel. Benjamin v. Hillhouse

1 Lans. 87 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1869

It is insisted by the board here, that the whole action of the comptroller was void, because he had no authority to appoint a referee to take the proof. I think the objection without force. … Whatever may have been regarded as the law, up to the decision of the two cases of The People v. The Board of Police ( 39 N. Y., 506 ), and The People v. The Board of Assessors of Brooklyn ( 39 N.

Emerson v. Buck

112 Misc. 1 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1920

be known as members of the board of education.” … Matter of Hirshfield v. Cook, 227 N. Y. 297 .

People ex rel. Fortunato v. Warden

48 Misc. 3d 649 · New York Supreme Court · May 8, 2015

Although the Board of Parole may, if it so chooses, consider an inmate’s mental health before granting parole (Matter of Ebbs v Regan, 54 AD2d 611 [4th Dept 1976]), it is not mandated to do so (9 NYCRR 8002.3 [a]). … Yet, the First Department, stating that a parolee’s mental competency must certainly be considered as a factor, said there was “no reason to hold that the Board may not render such a determination” (Matter of Lopez v Evans

Louhal Properties, Inc. v. Strada

191 Misc. 2d 746 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 28, 2002

(Defendants constituting the Board of Trustees of the Village of Westbury and/or the Village of Westbury Planning Board shall be hereinafter referred to as the Village.) … (People v Bunis, supra; Cowan v City of Buffalo, supra; Tyson v Tyler, supra; Trio Distrib. Corp. v City of Albany, 2 NY2d 690 .)

Woodworth v. Rice Bros.

110 Misc. 158 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1920

On this written agreement the defendant stood, but the court, following the decision of the Court of Appeals in the recent ease of Whipple v. Brown Bros. Co., 225 N. … We think the court committed no error in the course it pursued, and that its rulings were in strict compliance with the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case of Whipple v. Brown Bros. Co., 225 N. Y. 243 .

People ex rel. McIntyre v. Buttling

31 N.Y.S. 1132 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1894

Order affirmed on the opinion of Justice Cullen in the case of Peonle v. Jeremiah J. Cronin. Brown, P. J., not sitting.

Gail v. Gail

57 Misc. 545 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1908

Brown, J. On the settlement of the estate- of J. H. … Grant v. Johnson, 5 N. Y. 247 ; Acer v. Hotchkiss, 97 id. 395 ; Paine v. Brown, 37 id. 228; Bruce v. Carter, 72 id. 616; Kirtz v. Peck, 113 id. 222; Glenn v. Rossler, 156 id. 161.

Deimel v. Olney

18 Abb. N. Cas. 248 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1886

Wigand v. Dejonge ( 18 Hun, 405 -6; Steven v. Webb, 4 Civ. Pro. R. (Browne), 64; Willis v. … Friedberg v. Bates, 24 Hun, 375 ; Leigh v. Atwater, 2 Abb. N. C., 419 ; Kranz v. Dun, 8 Civ. Pro. R. (Browne), 403; Orden Germania v. Devender, 6 Civ. Pro, R. (Browne), 161; Kraft v. Dingee, 38 Hun, 345 .

Townsend v. Winburn

107 Misc. 443 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1919

In Godley v. Crandall & Godley Co., 212 N. Y. 121 , the court had before it the like question. … In Wetmore v. Cooper, 92 N.

People ex rel. Byrnes v. Green

64 Barb. 162 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1872

By the act of 1872, (ch. 9,) the board of audit, &c., was created. … The relators claim that the board should pass and allow the claim at the rate adopted by the board of supervisors. Such was not the direction of the statute. • The board was to audit.