Case law

Realy v. Caine

31 Misc. 2d 471 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 17, 1961

(Matter of Grimm v. Buffalo, 8 A D 2d 689.) … (Hunt v. Hunt, 72 N. Y. 217, 229-230 .)

Boyes v. Allen

59 Misc. 2d 975 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1968

(Matter of Board of Educ. v. Allen, 6 N Y 2d 127.) … It is felt that the same may be disposed of by reference to the case of Schreiner v.

People ex rel. Behar v. Fay

36 Misc. 2d 474 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1962

Clemente v. Warden, 9 N Y 2d 216). … the jurisdiction of the Board of Parole.

Headley v. Fennell

124 Misc. 886 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 10, 1924

The action of the superintendent of city planning and the advisory board anticipating such an application was ineffectual. … V, § 4, subd. k; Lincoln Trust Co. v. Williams Building Corp., 229 N. Y. 313, 317 ; Biggs v. Steinway & Sons, Id. 320 ; City of Utica v. Hanna, 202 App. Div. 610, 611 ; Matter of Eiss v. Summers, 205 id. 691 .

Nanuet Fire Engine Co. No. 1, Inc. v. Amster

177 Misc. 2d 296 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1998

Under Town Law § 170, the town board of any town may establish a fire district. … Hongisto v Mercure, 72 AD2d 850 ); State urban development corporations (Floyd v New York State Urban Dev.

Schunemann v. Paradise

46 How. Pr. 426 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1873

The discharge of this defendant is urged on the ground of infancy, and the counsel relies on the case of Brown agt. … In Eckstein v. Frank ( 1 Daly, 334 ), a similar view of the law was adopted in the common pleas, and Daly, P.

People v. Lewis

138 Misc. 2d 822 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1988

(People v Scarbrough, 105 AD2d 1107, 1109 [Boomer, J., dissenting opn], revd 66 NY2d 673 [per dissenting opn]; see also, People v Brown, 54 AD2d 719 .) … All parties having failed to act in accordance with the statute’s mandatory provisions, the sentence was invalid as a matter of law (People v Brown, supra), and must be set aside.

Cook v. New Amsterdam Real-Estate Ass'n

32 N.Y.S. 888 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1895

BROWN, P. J. … Hale v. Rogers, 22 Hun, 21 ; In re Bronson, 78 Hun, 351 , 29 N. Y. Supp. 112 . The order must be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with $10 costs.

Berma Management Corp. v. 140 W. 42nd St. Realty, Inc.

21 Misc. 2d 571 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1960

Kardwheel Corp. v. Karper, 1 Misc 2d 707 ), this action is found to be properly brought and maintained by the plaintiff corporation. (West View Hills v. … Lizau Realty Corp., 6 N Y 2d 344; Matter of Paloma Frocks [Shamokin Sportswear Corp.], 3 N Y 2d 572; Rothman & Schneider v. Beckerman, 2 N Y 2d 493.) The case of Sterling Ind. v. Ball Bearing Pen Corp. ( 298 N.

In re Bernheimer

4 Misc. 2d 503 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1943

under consideration, was finally authorized by the Board of Estimate and title to this and other damage parcels vested in the city February 9, 1942. … (Twyeffort v. Unexcelled Mfg. Co., 263 N. Y. 6 ; Hardin v. Morgan Lithograph Co., 247 N. Y. 332 ; Potter v. New York Infant Asylum, 44 Hun 367 , affd. without opinion 118 N. Y. 684 ; Elblum Holding Corp. v.

People ex rel. Pierce v. Cassidy

28 Misc. 589 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1899

In contending that they were entitled to be separately heard on the original application, the respondents overlook the fact that the writ was not directed to them as individuals, but to a board, of which they are members,

People ex rel. Kelly v. Scott

84 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 611 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1894

Canandaigua Water Works Co. v. Village of Canandaigua

97 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 605 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1895

Riesner v. Young

198 Misc. 624 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1950

There is much force to the defendants’ contention that the examination complained of met the standards laid down by the Court of Appeals in Matter of Sloat v. Board of Examiners ( 274 N. … Div. 320, 325 ; Matter of Kornbluth v. Rice, 250 App. Div. 654, 656 ).

In re the Election of Directors of the FDR-Woodrow Wilson Democrats, Inc.

57 Misc. 2d 743 · New York Supreme Court · May 16, 1968

meaning the Board of Directors] to set a date for continuing this meeting no later than three weeks from today’s date. … Matter of Melloh v. Beattie, 17 Misc 2d 902 ).

In re Herman

177 Misc. 276 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 8, 1941

Y., the board of education of union free school district No. 1 of the town of Franklinville, the board of education of the town of Farmersville, the appointing board of trustees of Ten Broeck Free Academy, and the Attorney-General … (Sherman v. Richmond Hose Co., 230 N. Y. 462 ; Trustees of Sailors’ Snug Harbor v. Carmody, 158 App. Div. 738 ; affd., 211 N. Y. 285 .) The opinion of the Court of Appeals in the Richmond Hose case by Andrews, J.

In re Delehanty

202 Misc. 40 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 20, 1952

Helvering v. Mitchell, 303 U. S. 391 ; Life & Casualty Co. v. McCray, 291 U. S. 566 ; Matter of Rouss, 221 N. Y. 81 ; Bowles v. Seitz, 62 F. Supp. 773 ; Perkins Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Owen, 293 Fed. 759 ; Levy v. … Garner v. Los Angeles Board, 341 U. S. 716 ; Adler v. Board of Education, 342 U. S. 485 ; Matter of Goldway v. Board of Higher Educ. of City of N. Y., 178 Misc. 1023 ).

Samson United Corp. v. Dover Manufacturing Co.

139 Misc. 312 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 13, 1931

Div. 822 ), or affect his “ standing, honesty and reliability ” in business (Brown v. Tregoe, 236 N. Y. 497 ), are libelous per se. … (Brown v. Tregoe, supra.)

Genesee Telephone Co. v. Szmigel

174 Misc. 2d 567 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 6, 1997

New York law requires the applicant to comply with the standards set forth in Matter of Consolidated Edison Co. v Hoffman ( 43 NY2d 598 [1978]) and Matter of Cellular Tel. Co. v Rosenberg ( 82 NY2d 364 [1993]). … Note that to the extent the area variance calls for the Board to use the weighing analysis of the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community against the benefit to the applicant (Matter of Sasso v Osgood,

People ex rel. Atkins v. Snyder

10 How. Pr. 143 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1854

Were the relators sued “in consequence of any act by them performed by direction of the district, or any act performed by virtue "of or under color of their office V If they were, they had a right to present their claim to … the board of supervisors in the manner prescribed in. the second section of the act of 1847.