 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Collins v. Glenwood Mgt. Corp., 7179N Index 22088/04,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since a resolution of the factual issue of where the injured person lived ultimately depended on evaluating the credibility of the affiants, a hearing had to be held to resolve any inconsistencies prior to determining proper venue.
|
|||||
| Daitch v. Naman, 7618 Index 126968/02,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conflicting opinions of the parties' experts raised issues of fact as to the existence of dangerous mold in a tenant's apartment, whether such mold was caused by water and particulate matter that entered the apartment because of a contractor's failure to exercise due care, and whether such mold caused the tenant's alleged injuries.
|
|||||
| Di Donato v. State of New York, 97802,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The evidence was insufficient to sustain an inmate's contention that an assault on him was the foreseeable result of any breach of duty on the State's part. He failed to establish any basis beyond his unsupported claim that a previous incident was gang-related for his contention that he was at special risk for an attack by a member of a gang.
|
|||||
| Florio v. Florio, 98013,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although trial court was not always required to equally divide marital property even after considering N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 236(B)(5)(d) factors, some semblance of parity had to be achieved, and under the circumstances of present case involving a lengthy marriage and wife's many contributions, the marital assets should have been divided evenly.
|
|||||
| Foster v. Daigle, 98716,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since, as a matter of law, the 14 and 16-year-old sons were not constructively emancipated as they were not "of employable age," the court could not suspend the father's child support obligation based on their abandonment.
|
|||||
| Holmes v. Holmes, 96608,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted a divorce to a husband pursuant to N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 170(1) based on cruel and inhuman treatment and denied the wife's request on the same grounds because the husband showed that the wife abused drugs and alcohol during the last three years of the marriage and had become physically aggressive toward him.
|
|||||
| Kramarik v. Travelers, 98287,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As insurer's interpretation of term "amusement device" in policy exclusion applied to most equipment used in insured's entertainment business, such as vinyl dance floor at issue, and contradicted insured's reasonable expectations as to coverage for injuries resulting from business operations, he was entitled to summary judgment on coverage issue.
|
|||||
| Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Warner), [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Matter of Babson v. Finch, Pruyn & Co., Inc., 97298,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employer failed to rebut presumption under N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 21(1) that an employee's unexplained work-related death was compensable with substantial evidence; a co-worker testified the employee was woozy after exposure to toxic fumes and then collapsed, striking his head on a machine and then on the concrete floor.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
