 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Franco v. Jay Cee of N. Y. Corp., 9186, Index 116383/01,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because testimony of defense experts regarding potential building code violations was based in part on the erroneous premise that 12 NYCRR § 23-2.5(b)(3) required a partition between elevator shaftways, it was prejudicial and improperly admitted, thus requiring a new trial in plaintiff's claim of a building owner's violations of Labor Law § 241(6).
|
|||||
| Frey v. Fedorciuc, 2005-10817, (Index No. 25891/04),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In personal injury case, summary judgment for defendants was reversed because defendants did not show that plaintiff did not sustain serious injury within Insurance Law § 5102(d)'s meaning. Defendants' experts concluded that plaintiff's limitations were due to his age but did not compare findings to normal range of motion of person plaintiff's age.
|
|||||
| Furey v. Sayville Union Free School Dist., 2005-06267, (Index No. 12847/99),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted school district summary judgment on complaint alleging personal injuries resulting from a trip-and-fall accident on a public sidewalk in front of a school building because plaintiffs did not raise issue of fact showing that school district caused defect through negligent construction or repair or through a special use.
|
|||||
| Fusco v. Fusco, 2005-05812, (Index No. 013348/04),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's statement to plaintiff's employer that plaintiff knew his nephew exposed himself to defendant's daughter was not defamatory as possessing knowledge of an event was not reasonably defamatory, but a claim that plaintiff filed a false police report could be defamatory as filing a false police report was a crime, under Penal Law § 175.30.
|
|||||
| Gonyon v. MB Tel., 2005-06855, (Index No. 15271/03),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In plaintiff's personal injury action, the trial court properly entered a verdict in favor of a rental company, because there was conflicting evidence as to whether a bolt installed by the rental company caused plaintiff's accident, which permitted the jury to rationally infer that the bolt was not involved in the accident.
|
|||||
| Kelley v. Garuda, 2005-00271, 2005-00273, (Index No. 7016/04),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Injunction was necessary to preserve status quo, as plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury should defendants sell, mortgage, or otherwise encumber property at issue. Finding that plaintiffs had not established likelihood of success on merits was based on erroneous determination that relevant causes of action were nonjusticiable.
|
|||||
| Kelley v. Garuda, 2006-00975, (Index No. 7016/04),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Kivlehan v. Waltner, 2006-01629, 2006-04505, (Index Nos. 2167/04 and 4906/05),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was error to refuse to compel disclosure of an obstetrician's infection control records under the quality assurance privilege of Education Law 6527(3) and Public Health Law §§ 2805-j, 2805-k, and 2805-m. Defendants had not shown that there was a review procedure and that the information sought was maintained in accordance with that procedure.
|
|||||
| Koeiman v. City of New York, 9491, Index 23549/93,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Fourth Amendment's standard of objective reasonableness, evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to permit jury to find that officers used excessive force in arresting plaintiff's decedent in that decedent without provocation assaulted an officer and officers used amount of force they reasonably believed was necessary to subdue decedent.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
