Case law

Frankson v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

2004 NY Slip Op 24225 · New York Supreme Court, Kings County · Jun 22, 2004

Frankson v Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. ( 2004 NY Slip Op 24225 ) Frankson v Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. 2004 NY Slip Op 24225 [ 4 Misc 3d 609 ] June 22, 2004 Supreme Court, Kings County Published by New York State … Frankson, Deceased, Plaintiff, v Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, Individually and as Successor by Merger to the American Tobacco Company, et al., Defendants.

Meyer v. Board of Liquor Control

69 Ohio Law. Abs. 407 · Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division · Apr 20, 1954

A similar question, however, was presented in the case of Solvey v. Molony, 40 California Appeals 2nd, 381. … The order of the Board is affirmed.

Ilasi v. Board of Zoning Appeals

79 Misc. 2d 436 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1973

[c] ; Matter of Phelan v. Theatrical Protective Union No. 1, 22 N Y 2d 34; Matter of Mohican Cable T. V. Corp. v. Cronin, 34 AD 2d 692 .) The amendment is patently void. … The courts have rejected an attempt to legalize use violations if there has been no change in permitted use in the district. ( See Rapasadi v.

Brown v. Lyle Stuart, Inc.

42 Misc. 2d 909 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1964

Courts have protected the following titles: “The King’s Sea Food” v. “ King of the Sea ” (Famous Sea Food House v. Skouras, 272 App. Div. 258 [1st Dept., 1947]; “ March of Time ” v. “ Voice of Time ” (Time, Inc. v. … Y. 1939]); “ The Fifth Column ” v. “ Fifth Column Squad ” (Hemingway v. Film Alliance, 174 Misc. 725 [Supreme Ct., N. Y. County, 1940]); “The Gold Diggers” v. “Gold Diggers of Paris ” (Warner Bros. Pictures v.

Pelham Towers v. Conciliation & Appeals Board

71 Misc. 2d 814 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1972

In this article 78 proceeding, petitioner landlord seeks a review of the determination of respondent Conciliation and Appeals Board (CAB) directing the landlord to roll back the rental of the subject premises to an amount … Federal Housing Comr. v. Reese ( 62 Misc 2d 522 ), relied on by petitioner, is not in point. There the FHA had taken over the property in foreclosure.

Ruane v. Virginia Real Estate Board

36 Va. Cir. 420 · Fairfax County Circuit Court · Jun 6, 1995

In this area, of course, the Court must accord considerable deference to the Board’s resolution. Va. Code Ann. § 9-6.14:17 ; Brown-Forman Corp. v. Sims Wholesale Co., 20 Va. App. 423 , 457 S.E.2d 426 (1995). … Brown-Forman, supra; see Virginia Supermarkets v. George, 18 Va. App. 452, 453 (1994). A determination of whether or not to grant the waiver must address the application submitted by Ms.

Board of Education v. Unknown Heirs

71 Ohio Law. Abs. 1 · Auglaize County Court of Common Pleas · Mar 12, 1954

Although it is concerned primarily with lands taken by appropriation, see McMechan v. Board of Education, 157 Oh St at page 251 where it cites Board of Education of Incorporated Village of Van Wert v. … Syllabus of Board of Education of Lebanon Village School District v. Hollingsworth et, 56 Oh Ap at page 95.

Jorling v. Freshwater Wetlands Appeals Board

147 Misc. 2d 880 · New York Supreme Court · May 31, 1990

The formal rules of procedure may be disregarded in administrative hearings (Matter of Simpson v Wolansky, 38 NY2d 391, 395 ; cf., Matter of Brown v Ristich, 36 NY2d 183 ). … See, Jorling v Freshwater Wetlands Appeals Bd., 147 Misc 2d 165,171 .

Wright v. Town Board of Carlton

70 Misc. 2d 1 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1972

In Kramer v. Union School Dist. ( 395 U. … The finding by the Town Board that all lands in the town would be benefited by the improvements is generally held to be the product of the legislative power (Gaynor v. Marohn, 268 N. Y. 417 [1935]; Valley Farms Co. v.

Brewer v. Board of Liquor Control

66 Ohio Law. Abs. 191 · Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division · Apr 30, 1953

The school authorities were notified but did not appear for the hearing before the Board. Mr. N. J. … Entry accordingly with exceptions by counsel for the Board.

Muccioli v. Board of Standards & Appeals

42 Misc. 2d 1088 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1964

(See Mann- v. … The court has not failed to consider Matter of K & K Leasing Corp. v. Murdoch ( 263 App. Div. 714 , opp. dsmd. 287 N. Y. 842 ).

Brown v. New York City Department of Education

26 Misc. 3d 862 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 2, 2009

His determination in such respects cannot be nullified unless it “lacks a factual basis” (Matter of Williams v City of New York, 64 NY2d 800, 802 [1985]; Matter of Bolusi v City of New York, 249 AD2d 134 [1998]). … WL 217145 , 1993 US Dist LEXIS 8142 [ED NY, June 2, 1993]) and Blood v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y. ( 121 AD2d 128 [1986]).

Brown v. Curran Construction Co.

191 Misc. 847 · City of New York Municipal Court · Jun 9, 1948

(Citizen’s Bank of White Plains v. Oglesby, 270 App. Div. 136 .) This court is a court of record. … The case of Ward v. Orsini ( 125 Misc. 407 ) is not contrary to but in support of that proposition inasmuch as it was an equitable proceeding to ascertain and fix the lien.

Gibson v. Culver

17 Wend. 305 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1837

Nor do I understand the force of usage in such a case to be denied, but on the contrary, it is expressly admitted in Ostrander v. Brown (15 Johns. R. 39). In Sewall v. … In Golden v. Manning (2 Bl. R. 916; 3 Wilson, 425 , 433, S. C. and see Storr v.

Ware v. Town Board of Parish

52 Misc. 2d 802 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1965

Trustees of Vil. of Jamaica v. Board of Supervisors of Queens County ( 131 N. Y. 468 ). … Co. v. Hylan ( 240 N.

South Union Township Board of Auditors v. South Union Township Board of Supervisors

75 Pa. D. & C.2d 324 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Fayette County · Mar 26, 1976

This amount is sur *326 charged for the reason that such work was not authorized by proper resolution of the board of township supervisors. … It is not questioned that the money was, in fact, paid, nor is it questioned *328 that the board authorized its payment.

World Exchange Bank v. Brown

128 Misc. 449 · City of New York Municipal Court · Dec 6, 1926

I have looked at the case of Wesenberg v. McCormack ( 119 Misc. 775 ), and while the decision in that case is not binding upon me, the reasoning in support of that decision is so clear that I accept it. … There is no dispute that the fund out of which the city chamberlain -paid the $237.65 was created by a deposit either by the defendant Brown or the third party, Billek, on behalf of the defendant to afford the said Brown

Stanley v. New York State Board

31 Misc. 3d 911 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 13, 2011

(Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 476 [2000]; Matter of King v New York State Div. of Parole, 190 AD2d 423 [1st Dept 1993], affd 83 NY2d 788 [1994]; Matter of Rios v New York State Div. of Parole, 15 Misc 3d 1107[A … give equal weight to each factor (Matter of Gelsomino v New York State Bd. of Parole, 82 AD3d 1097 [2d Dept 2011]; Matter of Huntley v Evans, 77 AD3d 945 [2d Dept 2010]; Matter of Miller v New York State Div. of Parole,

Herrick v. Grow

5 Wend. 579 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1830

I cannot distinguish this case from that of The Overseers of Bridgewater v.

Pfau v. Public Employment Relations Board

24 Misc. 3d 260 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 19, 2009

Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222 , 231 (1974). . Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn. v New York State Pub. Empl. … Auth. v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 8 NY3d 226, 232-233 (2007).