|
| |
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
|
| |
People v. Tejada, 9988, SCI 6280/03,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
People v. Tinnin, 9993, Ind. 181/01,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
People v. Vaughn, 10034, Ind. 2325/03,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because defendant was the "boss" of a well-organized gang, he actually handed an assailant one of the dangerous instruments used in an assault, and he gave the order for the attack to begin, there was ample evidence establishing defendant's accessorial liability with respect to second-degree assault under Penal Law § 120.05(2) and a weapon offense.
|
|
| |
Remy v. City of New York, 2005-06574, Index Nos. 10084/02, 13378/03,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because the city defendants established that the actions of their workers was not the proximate cause of the accident which killed the survivors' decedent, but such came from the act of a driver who drove from the center lane into the right lane despite his obstructed view, the city defendants were properly granted summary judgment.
|
|
| |
Ritz v. Ritz, 10035, Index 300826/01,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Security Mut. Life Insurance Co. of N.Y. v. Herpaul, 9411, Index 603732/04,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Insurer's claim against the owner and the insured for fraud in obtaining the policies should have been dismissed as time barred because the insurer did not bring the claim within two years of the effective policy date as required by the express terms of the policy and by Insurance Law § 3203(a)(3) and N.J. Admin. Code § 11:4-41.3(b)(3)(I).
|
|
| |
Singh v. Friedson, 2006-01739, Index No. 10918/00,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because a motion to compel was the only device available to a defendant to ensure compliance with both the subpoena duces tecum and the regulations in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, 42 U.S.C.S. § 1320d et seq., CPLR 3122(a), the trial court properly granted the motion.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
