|
| |
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 12, 2006
|
| |
People v. Williams, 14377,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant's conviction of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree was affirmed; variances regarding the search of an informant's trunk were not so significant to cause a reversal, and there was no merit to a challenge based on the police's failure to conduct a body cavity search of the informant before a purchase.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Pharma Consult, Inc. v. Nutrition Tech. LLC, 7562 Index 601233/03,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where limitations on an arbitrator's authority to make an award were set forth in a completely different part of the parties' agreement from the authority to conduct the arbitration in question, the award was not subject to vacatur under N.Y. C.P.L.R. 7511(b)(1)(iii).
|
|
| |
Portlette v. Metropolitan Tr. Auth., 6948 Index 110874/03,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because an employee was on probation at the time of her termination and because she was not employed by a N.Y. Civ. Serv. Law art. 14 or a N.Y. Lab. Law art. 20 employer, pursuant to N.Y. C.P.L.R. 217(1), the four-month statute of limitations for her N.Y. C.P.L.R. art. 78 proceeding ran from the date of termination.
|
|
| |
Portlette v. Metropolitan Tr. Auth., 6948, (Index 110874/03),
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Sabo v. Alan B. Brill, P.C., 7561-7561A, Index 100055/04,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Sakow v. 633 Seafood Rest., Inc., 7557 Index 606626/97,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Salemeh v. Toussaint, 6921 Index 118056/01,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Intentional tort claims against a union local were properly dismissed because plaintiff failed to plead that the entire membership of a union local authorized in advance, or subsequently ratified, an alleged assault upon him, but the order on appeal incorrectly dismissed the entire complaint against an individual individually.
|
|
| |
Strongback Corp. v. N.E.D. Cambridge Ave. Dev. Corp., 7039N Index 14633/04,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 12, 2006, Decided , January 12, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because a general contractor's own invoice showed that it had been overpaid for the work done, its filing of a mechanic's lien was altogether without justification; therefore, pursuant to N.Y. Lien Law § 39, the lien was wilfully exaggerated, leaving only the issue of damages to be determined.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
