|
| |
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 - February 1, 2007
|
| |
Matter of M & E Christopher LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 103, Index 103525/05,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Nelson v. Goord, 500712,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Sobel v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., 500191,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Client's application under CPLR 7511 to vacate arbitration award was properly dismissed. Errors that client alleged occurred in not allowing him to amend his complaint and refusing to allow certain evidence were procedural matters and were left to arbitrator's discretion. Client's claim that an arbitrator had conflict of interest was without merit.
|
|
| |
Matter of Sylvester v. Goord, 500653,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Wife's admission that she mailed cell phones to her husband's correctional facility, confidential information indicating that the phones were intended to be used in an escape, and an investigator's testimony regarding serious threats that cell phones posed provided substantial evidence to support revocation of wife's visitation privileges.
|
|
| |
Matter of Tafari v. Selsky, 500589,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Witherill, 500225,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Judgment was affirmed as primary executor's pattern of misconduct warranted denial of commissions and revocation of letters issued to him under SCPA 711(2) and (7) as he intentionally delayed making distributions of estate assets to beneficiary, and acted in bad faith, motivated solely out of spite due to beneficiary's separate suit against him.
|
|
| |
People ex rel. Suce v. Taylor, 500586,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
People v. Bruchanan, 114, Ind. 4683/02,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
People v. Colvin, 100095,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: In defendant's prosecution on four counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, trial counsel provided effective assistance as his cross-examination of the victim, defendant's teenage daughter, regarding other uncharged acts of sexual abuse was proper to challenge the victim's credibility by establishing various inconsistencies.
|
|
| |
People v. Dashnaw, 15513,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, February 1, 2007, Decided , February 1, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Conviction for second degree burglary, Penal Law § 140.25, was sufficiently supported by evidence that, after tenant opened apartment door, defendant burst in and attacked subtenant's boyfriend. Defendant was not invited in on this occasion, and remained in apartment after being told to leave, so any privilege to enter was revoked.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
