Case law

Barney v. City of New York

39 Misc. 719 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1903

Gray v. Manhattan R. Co., 128 N. Y. 509 ; Riedeman v. Mount Morris Electric Light Co., 56 App. Div. 23 . . … In McElroy v. Kansas City, 21 Fed. Repr. 261, Mr.

Pina v. Hammock

109 Misc. 2d 980 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1981

The New York State Board of Parole, in evaluating petitioner’s minimum period of incarceration, considered that the petitioner had two prior felony convictions. … The Parole Board has an obligation in determining a person’s sentence to evaluate his prior criminal record.

State Commission for Human Rights v. Farrell

43 Misc. 2d 958 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 24, 1964

(Matter of Board of Higher Educ. of City of N. Y. v. Carter, 14 N Y 2d 138.) 6 Denial of the right to be trained in many industries is tantamount to denial of employment. … See, e.g., Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U. S. 483 (State imposed segregated public schools); Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U. S. 1 (racial restrictive covenants); Burton v. Wilmington Park Auth., 365 U.

Smith Agricultural Chemical Co. v. Calvert

7 Ohio N.P. (n.s.) 103 · Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division · Apr 28, 1908

In the case of Downey v. The Indiana State Board of Agriculture, 129 Ind., 443 , the Supreme Court of Indiana decided that the Indiana State Board of Agriculture was a private corporation. … The case of Thompson v. Lambert, 44 Iowa, 239 , is also authority upon the point that this State Board of Agriculture is not a public agency of the state.

People ex rel. Schlecter v. Jennings

130 Misc. 748 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1927

Kane v. Hanley, 116 Misc. 624 ; People v. Madden. 120 App. Div. 338 ), and the exercise of the discretionary *752 power vested in the Parole Board to revoke a prisoner’s parole cannot be reviewed on habeas corpus. … Ackron v. Hunt, 122 Misc. 247 .)

Kalmbacher v. Kalmbacher

63 Pa. D. & C. 195 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Susquehanna County · Mar 13, 1945

See Kennedy v. Orem, 15 Dist. R. 329; McCalmont v. McCalmont, 93 Pa. Superior Ct. 203 . … Again, in Schofield v. Schofield (No. 1), 51 Pa.

People ex rel. Bradley v. Stephens

2 Abb. Pr. 348 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1866

A similar suggestion was made in relation to the act amending the city charter, in Phillips v. The Mayor, &c., (1 Hilton, 483). In Baldwin v. … In the People v. Stevens ( 5 Hill, 616 , 627), such an application was denied, on the ground that a better remedy existed, and that another claimed the office under color of title. In the People v. Dikeman ( 7 How.

Caso v. Coffey

83 Misc. 2d 614 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1975

(Steelworkers v Warrior & Gulf Co., 363 US 574 ; Steelworkers v Enterprise Corp., 363 US 593 ; Steelworkers v American Mfg. Co., 363 US 564 .) … ) teach further, that an award of a public arbitration panel must be deemed to be an order of the Public Employment Relations Board ("PERB”) for the purpose of review.

In re Wadsworth

88 Ohio Law. Abs. 170 · Ohio Public Utilities Commission · Jun 9, 1960

Brown, Registered Pharmacist, Wadsworth, Ohio; Mr. James C. Morris, Senior Vice President of Ohio Box Board, Wadsworth, Ohio; Mr. Jack Sommers, Automobile Dealer, Wadsworth, Ohio; Mrs. Raymond C. … V. Hanson Sheet Metal, Wadsworth, Ohio; Mr. Joseph George, Production & Purchasing Manager, Wadsworth Foundry Company, Wadsworth, Ohio; Mr.

Central School District No. 2 of Towns of Coeymans v. New York State Teachers Retirement System

46 Misc. 2d 225 · New York Supreme Court · May 3, 1965

(Board), the individual members of the Board and C. … (Matter of O’Connell v. Kern, 287 N. Y. 297, 301 ; Matter of Williams v. Morton, 297 N. Y. 328, 334 ; Matter of Gimprich v. Board of Educ. of City of N. 7., 306 N. Y. 401, 405 .)

In re Heyman

137 Misc. 278 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1930

Under the circumstances the board was without jurisdiction to reopen the case and entertain what was, in effect, an application that it set aside and rescind its former decision. (See Matter of Biker v. … Ridgeway v.

Grundt v. Shenk

127 Misc. 889 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1926

(Examine Ide v. Brown, 178 N. Y. 26, 42 .) Being so unenforcible, I hold that the latter promise constituted no consideration at all for the alleged promise of the decedent. (Id.) … In Bumpus v.

Langan v. Francklyn

20 N.Y.S. 404 · New York City Court · Mar 19, 1892

Brown, then and now secretary and treasurer of the company. Francklyn gave him 10 shares of the stock without consideration. The control of the Union Gaslight Company thus passed into the hands of Mr. … taken for that purpose a court can go behind the record of stockholders as shown by the transfer book, with a view of inquiring as to whether the parties in whose names stock stands are really the owners thereof, (Strong v.

Leichter v. Barrett

208 Misc. 577 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 18, 1955

Co. v. Hylan, 240 N. Y. 199 , and People ex rel. Trustees of Vill. of Jamaica v. Board of Supervisors, 131 N. Y. 468 .) … (See Parkplain Realty Corp. v. Town Board of Hempstead, 137 N. Y. S. 2d 474, Christ, J.; Birchwood Knolls, Inc., v. Hunter, N. Y. L. J., April 7, 1955, p. 11, col. 1, Ritchie, J.; Matter of Lerner [Young], N. Y. L.

People ex rel. New England Telegraph Co. v. Woodbury

63 Misc. 1 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1909

Co. v. State Board of Tax Commissioners, 174 N. … Co. v. Roberts, 154 N. Y. 101 .)

Eldridge & Higgins v. Heaton & Co.

7 Ohio C.C. 499 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Sep 15, 1893

Referring to the reasoning which is at the foundation of Leroux v. Brown. Willes, J., in Williams v. Wheeler, 8 C. B. N. … If the doctrine of Leroux v. Brown, is law, the converse must be law.

People v. Hooker

118 Misc. 2d 760 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 5, 1983

, People v Brown, 48 NY2d 388 ; People v McCurdy, 86 AD2d 493 ; People v Cadby, 75 AD2d 713 ; People v Jacobson, 109 Misc 2d 204 ). … , supra; People v Brown, supra; People v McCurdy, supra; People v Cadby, supra; People v De Lucia, 20 NY2d 275 ).

330 West End Apartment Corp. v. Kelly

124 Misc. 2d 870 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1984

article V of plaintiff’s by-laws. … (Au erbach v Bennett, 47 NY2d 619 ; Smith v Baillie, 44 NYS2d 217 , affd 266 App Div 950 ; Hanson v Ontario Milk Producers Coop., 58 Misc 2d 138 ; Garrison Apts. v Sabourin, 113 Misc 2d 674 .)

Gressman v. Peoples Service Drug Stores, Inc.

10 Va. Cir. 397 · Richmond County Circuit Court · Feb 9, 1988

This is true, according to plaintiff, not only because no ambiguity exists in the statute’s language (see Brown v. … The "Board” referred to in the definition is the State Board of Pharmacy.

Connecticut River Estates, Inc. v. Luchsinger

52 Misc. 2d 620 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 13, 1967

lacking (Narragansett Inn v. … Absent some basis for a reconsideration, upon proper notice and hearing, the Planning Board was without the ability and power to revoke a final approval resolved (Matter of Northbury Estates v. Long Is. Light.