Case law

People ex rel. City of Buffalo v. Mazurowski

181 Misc. 891 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1943

It has been stated as the general rule that one claiming exemption from general taxation assumes the burden of showing that his (or its) right to immunity has been “ granted in terms too plain to be mistaken. … The agreements also clearly provide that the user granted was one in common with others authorized by the City to use the premises.

In re Funkhouser

157 Misc. 400 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1935

I am of the opinion that the candidate must be qualified when the voting begins and remain qualified throughout the time the polls are open at least. … Clearly, under these definitions, the applicant was not qualified, even granting his contention that the deed was legally recorded at ten-ten A.

Henningsen v. MarkoWitz

132 Misc. 547 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1928

A new agency was then established and the boy’s possession of the explosive was referable to that permission and not to the original taking. … It would enable violators of this statute to obtain immunity from liability as soon as a boy’s parent knew that his son had bought a gun.

People v. Durio

7 Misc. 3d 729 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 2, 2005

Court analyzed the anomaly of dying declarations from a historical perspective, stating the Sixth Amendment “is most naturally read as a reference to the right of confrontation at common law, admitting only those exceptions established … Dying declarations are clearly an aberration. Their admissibility must be considered in the context of the overwhelming interest of public policy.

Williams v. Kennedy

1 Misc. 2d 804 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 2, 1956

The principle so relied on by the petitioner is too well established to admit of doubt. … character or reputation or mental or physical unfitness for the position are clearly inapplicable here, for admittedly his certification was not revoked.

Kittredge v. Langley

132 Misc. 361 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1928

. *364 The opinion of Lehman, J., indicates quite clearly that the court regarded the action as one against Lawrence in his individual capacity, the partnership being unrepresented (p. 194): “ In view of the allegations of … Otherwise a special partner would be rendered immune against suit on a tort claim against the partnership merely because one or more general partners resided without the State.

People v. Korkala

121 Misc. 2d 291 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1983

CBS cites two recent cases to establish its thesis that a newsman has an absolute privilege under the Shield Law and not a qualified one as suggested by the District Attorney. … It in no way extended the qualified privilege to be an absolute one. *298 Clearly, the relevant legislative history of a statute provides an important source of insight into the meaning and intent of the law as enacted and

Eaton v. Benton

2 Hill & Den. 576 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1842

It was received and passed upon by the referees; and the defendants cannot complain unless the report is clearly against the weight of evidence. … It is highly probable that the estate in remainder exceeded in value the amount of the debt; but there is no proof which conclusively establishes that fact.

Grant v. Board of Elections

98 Misc. 2d 644 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 3, 1978

Therefore, subdivision 2 of section 7-108 of the Election Law was clearly not applicable to this case. … The fifth and final cause of action deals with the court approval of the original appropriation plan that established the Rockland County Legislature.

People v. Campos

176 Misc. 2d 637 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1998

Clearly, the People had a duty to respond to defendant’s January 20, 1998 letter in a timely manner. … Five days’ notice is sufficient to qualify as a reasonable opportunity for defendant to exercise his right to testify.

Barcacel v. City of Yonkers

52 Misc. 3d 544 · New York Supreme Court · May 4, 2016

Further, defendants maintain that the plaintiff must establish recklessness to recover, which plaintiff cannot do. … This statutory qualified immunity “precludes the imposition of liability for otherwise privileged conduct except where the conduct rises to the level of recklessness.”

Komarov v. Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc.

180 Misc. 2d 658 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 8, 1999

The privilege established by the Civil Rights Law applies not only to a transcript of the judicial proceeding itself, “but also to any pleading made within the course of the proceeding (Campbell v New York Evening Post, 245 … by the Court of Appeals in Holy Spirit Assn. for Unification of World Christianity v New York Times Co. ( 49 NY2d 63, 67 ), “[f]or a report to be characterized as ‘fair and true’ within the meaning of the statute, thus immunizing

Sullivan v. Crisona

54 Misc. 2d 478 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 31, 1967

But Special Term did not rest on that proposition disposing of the ease on the defense of qualified privilege, finding the defendant there free of malice and bad faith. … Additionally, it is vulnerable because' the first complaint to the Uptown Association, as already established, was not dismissed.

People v. Barysh

95 Misc. 2d 616 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1978

The act clearly serves a legitimate public purpose. … The defendants might have achieved this result by waiving immunity and testifying before the Grand Jury. Having elected not to do so they cannot complain regarding their own tactical decisions.

Sharp v. Mayor of New York

40 Barb. 256 · New York Supreme Court · May 4, 1863

The granting to a body aggregate certain powers, rights and privileges which it may use, possess and enjoy, will not give that body immunity from wrongs or unlawful acts committed by it in the carrying out of those powers … This is clearly the doctrine of the case in 23 Wend.

Krauskopf v. Perales

146 Misc. 2d 619 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1990

Public assistance or care shall not be withheld when need is indicated, pending the establishment of State-charge status.” … Thus the contact with out-of-State sources described later in 18 NYCRR 310.1 (g) is clearly an alternative method *623 of verification when the interview itself does not provide verification.

People v. Wilson

80 Misc. 2d 353 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1974

In .other instances, they ¡have clearly done just the reverse. In still others, ¡their concern in this area has been not so clearly expressed. The present case, at best, seems to fall in this latter category. … The only other conceivable area of challenge would be the privileges and immunities section .of the Constitution.

Z.T. ex rel. Taylor v. Long Island College Hospital

53 Misc. 3d 313 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 12, 2016

The child therefore qualifies, under Public Health Law § 2999-h, to be provided with all future health care costs, as defined in Public Health Law § 2999-h (3), through the New York State Medical Indemnity Fund (MIF), established … However, the MIF is clearly applicable to qualifying claims presented to the trust.

Sands v. Weingrad

99 Misc. 2d 598 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1979

. * Since the Federal Government has waived its sovereign immunity from suit only in the District Courts or the Court of Claims, the State would lack jurisdiction to consider these claims. … Clearly some matters pertaining to the enforcement of the Internal Revenue Code are most appropriately resolved in the Federal courts.

Astor v. Union Insurance

7 Cow. 202 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1827

So far, though well qualified to testify to the understanding of insurers, they were clearly not so well skilled as the plaintiffs’ witnesses in the nomenclature of the trade. … It is said the technical meaning should be clearly established. Be it so. Though we may think it clearly established in this case, we do not see enough to prevent a jury from coming to that conclusion.