Case law

People v. New York & Staten Island Ferry Co.

14 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 105 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1876

(See opinion of Brown, J., in Lowndes v. Dickerson, 31 Barb., 586 .) But while I have no doubt of the validity of the grant, I have none either as to the power of' the legislature to pass the act of 1857. … Lawrence, 2 Hun, 163 ; Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 Wall., 724 ; Gould v. Hudson R. R. R. Co., 6 N. Y., 522 .)

de Lima v. Mitchell

49 Misc. 171 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1906

Proof of the existence of hotels or boarding-houses of the character above referred to does not establish a breach of such covenant. Murray v. Charman, supra. … Levy v. Halcyon Casino Hotel Co., 45 Misc. Rep. 289 ; Ronald v. Miller, 139 N. Y. 93 .

Carbonel v. Ocasio

41 Misc. 2d 33 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1963

(Floyd v. United Hosp. of Port Chester, 13 A D 2d 788; Car-Vel Realty Corp. v. Ginsburg, 8 A D 2d 948; Rosenstein v. Rothenberg, 9 A D 2d 663; Adriance v. Clifford, 278 App. Div. 735 ; Firth Carpet Co. v. … (Majestic Refrigerator Corp. v. *35 Stassou, supra, a delay of 3 years; Brown v. City of New York, 1 A D 2d 905, a delay of 3 years and 4 months; Levine v.

Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Ass'n v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

117 Misc. 2d 343 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1982

limit expenditures as the board determined on August 19, 1982. … (Gambar *354 Enterprises v Kelly Servs., 69 AD2d 297 ; Albini v Solork Assoc., 37 AD2d 835 .) Plaintiffs have met this burden.

John Kennedy & Co. v. New York World's Fair 1939 Inc.

174 Misc. 729 · New York Supreme Court · May 2, 1940

The code referred to (Laws of 1936, chap. 544, § 3) was to be prepared by the Fair Corporation, submitted to the board of estimate and apportionment for approval, and if it was approved by such board, it might by such board … In support of this contention, the city quotes Leonard v. City of Brooklyn ( 71 N. Y. 498 ) as follows: “ In Darlington v. Mayor ( 31 N.

Hoff v. Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias

98 Misc. 61 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1916

Certificate, Condition No. 2; Lahey v. Lahey, 174 N. Y. 146, 152 ; Sabin v. Phinney, 134 id. 423. … Fink v. Fink, 171 N. Y. 616, 622 ; Coyne v. Bowe, 23 App. Div. 261 ; affd., 161 N. Y. 633 ; Tidd v. McIntyre, 116 App. Div. 602 ; Ancient Order of Gleaners v. Bury, 130 N. W. Rep. 191 . In Fink v.

People v. Perez

37 Misc. 3d 272 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2012

In fact, when the Second Department in Matter of Brown v Blumenfeld ( 89 AD3d 94 [2011], supra), had the opportunity to do so, it left the door open. … The language that replaced this language is: “If there is something you would like us to investigate concerning this incident, if you tell us about it, we will look into it” (Matter of Brown v Blumenfeld, 89 AD3d 94 , 98

Corcoran & Kostelanetz v. Dupuy

15 Misc. 2d 462 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1958

v. … Plaintiffs, by joining a cause of action which is not eligible for attachment with one in which an attachment is authorized, are not entitled to an attachment (Brown v. Chaminade Velours, 176 Misc. 238 , affd. 261 App.

Buffalo Loan, Trust & Safe-Deposit Co. v. Knights Templar & Masonic Mutual Aid Ass'n

9 N.Y.S. 346 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 11, 1890

Goldschmidt v. Insurance Co., 102 N. Y. 486 , 7 N. E. Rep. 408. … Sherman v. Scott, 27 Hun, 331 -334; Hincken v. Insurance Co., 50 N. Y. 657 .

Knapp v. Fowler

37 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 512 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1883

The real estate was sold 18th January, 1881, at the price of $3,000, and the vendor took in payment a bond and mortgage executed to the defendant by Luther Brown for v$3,000, dated 6th of May, 1876, payable seven years.from … The testimony offered by the defendant to show that the foreclosure of the prior mortgage on the Brown property was gotten up by Brown and his son in fraud of Brown’s creditors was properly excluded.

Lefurgy v. New York & N. R. Co.

3 N.Y.S. 302 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1888

We regard Brown v. Railroad Co., 12 N.

Incorporated Village v. Lynbrook Police Benevolent Ass'n

87 Misc. 2d 57 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1976

(See Professional Staff Congress/CUNY v Board of Higher Educ., 83 Misc 2d 900 ; Matter of Cardinale v Andersen, 75 Misc 2d 210, 218 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v Connetquot Teachers Assn., 74 Misc 2d 336 .) … (See Matter of Municipal Housing Auth. for City of Yonkers v New York State Public Employment Relations Bd., 46 AD2d 911 ; see, also, Matter of Board of Co-op. Educ.

59 Front St. Realty Corp. v. Klaess

6 Misc. 2d 774 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1957

The court will not instruct the board of appeals upon its duties at this time. … Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon ( 260 U. S. 393, 416 ) seems particularly appropriate to this situation.

Gross v. New York State Teachers Retirement System

81 Misc. 2d 964 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1975

anyone else, been appointed as executor (executrix) or administrator (administratrix) of the deceased’s estate there is authority that such a fiduciary might ratify acts taken for the *967 benefit of the deceased (Rosenberg v … This finding was reviewed and approved by the Retirement Board of the New York State Teachers’ Retirement System on July 24, 1974.

People v. Wright

104 Misc. 2d 911 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1980

Rivers v Myers, 384 F2d 737; United States ex rel. Brown v Rundle, 417 F2d 282). However, these holdings were based upon the fact that there were serious doubts about the voluntariness and accuracy of the confession. … Sperling v Fitzpatrick, 426 F2d 1161 [CCA 2d]; United States v Hill, 447 F2d 817 [CCA 7th]; United States v Brown, 488 F2d 94 [CCA 5th]; United States v Farmer, 512 F2d 160 [CCA 6th]; United States v Vandemark, 522 F2d 1019

Rockefeller v. Taylor

28 Misc. 460 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1899

New England Dressed Meat & Wool Co. v. Roberts, 155 N. … McMillen v. Vanderpoel, 35 App.

Franc v. Davidson

155 Misc. 382 · New York Supreme Court · May 2, 1935

There is no doubt that the board of aldermen has the power to regulate water rates. Sections 46 and 469 of the Greater New York Charter give such power. (Johnson-Kahn Co. v. Thompson, 68 Misc. 639, 641 .) … It cannot delegate the power to a private individual or public officer, board or commission. (Gautier v. Ditmar, supra; Matter of District No. 2, Town of Brookhaven, 214 App. Div. 40 .)

In re Chamot

201 Misc. 374 · New York Supreme Court · May 3, 1951

(Unger v. Loewy, 236 N. Y. 73, 78 .) … Y. 349; Matter of Brown, 212 App. Div. 677 , affd. 240 N. Y. 646 .) Such choice should be made as, in all probability, would be made by Mrs. Chamot, if she were sane. (Matter of Hills, supra; Matter of Brown, supra.)

Duane Thomas Loft Tenants Ass'n v. Sylvan Lawrence Co.

117 Misc. 2d 360 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1982

Assoc. v Lenox Hill Hosp., 38 NY2d 525, 528 ; Mehlman Mgt. Corp. v *367 Meyers, 51 AD2d 949 ; cf. Axelrod Co. v Duffin, NYLJ, Sept. 3, 1982, p 6, col 1). … The clear purpose of the statutory enactment is to confer upon the loft board all issues with respect to coverage, including rent disputes *368 and to remove these matters from the courts (see Axelrod Co. v Duffin, NYLJ,

Dominy v. Miller

33 Barb. 386 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1861

By the Court, Brown, J. … Lott, Emott and Brown, Justices.] The judgment should be entered upon the verdict for the defendant.