|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases —
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case —
for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more.
lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
|
| |
State Courts -
New York - January 9, 2007
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Bailey v. New York Westchester Sq. Med. Ctr., 9609-9609A, Index 6288/02,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: An employee showed no discrimination under Executive Law § 296 and Administrative Code of the City of NY § 8-107 as (1) her job was eliminated and she was not replaced, (2) she was laid off with males and females of mixed ages and races to reduce expenses, (3) her job was not like a retained one, and (4) the reasons for her layoff were not pretext.
|
|
| |
Bajanov v. Grossman, 2006-01640, (Index No. 44883/03),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a medical malpractice action, denial of defendants' motion for leave to amend their answer was improper, as the granting of leave to amend would not have resulted in prejudice or surprise to the patient. Defendants were entitled to dismissal of the complaint based upon their affirmative defense of lack of capacity to sue (CPLR 3211(a)(3)).
|
|
| |
Beharry v. Public Stor., Inc., 2005-05941,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Trial court properly granted judgment as a matter of law to plaintiffs on the issue of defendants' liability under Labor Law § 240(1), because metal decking through which a worker fell was a safety device within the meaning of the statute, and the worker's conduct was not the sole proximate cause of his injuries.
|
|
| |
Black v. Regalado, 10036, Index 8742/03,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
CPI Contr., Inc. v. Expert Elec., Inc., 2006-00479, (Index No. 4443/04),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Plaintiff's appeal from denial of its motion to renew its motion to vacate was dismissed; motion to renew was not based on new facts unavailable at time of motion to vacate and plaintiff failed to reasonably justify its failure to present to new facts under CPLR 2221(e), so motion to renew was one to reargue, denial of which was not appealable.
|
|
| |
CSEA Empl. Benefit Fund v. Warwick Val. Cent. School Dist., 2005-04369, (Index No. 2004-6741),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Trial court properly granted a benefit fund's motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim against a school district pursuant to Education Law § 3813(2-a), as a contract required the district to make monthly payments to the fund, and a new breach occurred for statute of limitations purposes every time the district failed to make a payment.
|
|
| |
Came Realty, LLC v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, 2005-06598, 2005-06600, (Index No. 7914/02),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Campbell v. Thomas, 2004-09521, (Index No. 1756/01),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Court granted summary judgment against defendant, as she failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to decedent's mental capacity to make the decision to marry her, and failed to raise a triable the issue of fact as to the decedent's requisite mental capacity to make the subject changes to his bank accounts.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
