 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Matter of Jweid v. Vicks Lithograph & Print., 96280,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A New York Workers' Compensation Board decision ruling that a claimant was entitled to a schedule loss of use award of 40% for his left foot drop injury was affirmed; there was a consensus of medical opinion that the claimant suffered a consequential left foot drop injury due to the surgeries necessitated by his back injury.
|
|||||
| Matter of Lacroix v. Syracuse Exec. Air Serv., Inc., 98381,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer was not entitled to have schedule award under N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 15(3), which had been directed to be paid as a lump sum, be paid in periodic payments under N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 25(1) or commuted to present value under N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 27 because schedule award was not allocable to any particular period of disability.
|
|||||
| Matter of Mack v. Board of Appeals, Town of Homer, 98567,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A town's zoning ordinance permitting a home professional office was interpreted as only including learned professions, such as law, medicine, accounting, music, art, or engineering, and did not include a pest extermination business. Therefore, a trial court's annulment of a town board of appeals' decision allowing the business was upheld.
|
|||||
| Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 102034/05,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK COUNTY, January 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Matter of Pettengill v. Kirley, 97285,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A judgment granting a father the opportunity for increased visitation with his son once he demonstrated a series of successful visits was affirmed; the father did not always manage his medication for bipolar disorder properly, leading to incidents of inappropriate behavior. Initially awarding him limited, supervised visitation was appropriate.
|
|||||
| Matter of Piotrowski, 98356,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In light of proposed development of a property partially owned by a decedent, and the fact that a portion was ultimately developed as a store, the trial court properly relied upon an expert's opinion that separate zoning designations should be considered in determining the property's highest and best use, as opposed to valuing it as a single farm.
|
|||||
| Matter of Rice v. Novello, 98622,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under N.Y. Soc. Serv. Law § 366, department of social services properly attributed income to Medicaid applicant where revocable trust expressly precluded amendment by agent; daughter's amendment under power of attorney was ineffective to make trust irrevocable; of amendment ratification after benefits were denied was not retroactively effective.
|
|||||
| Matter of Rivera v. New York City Hous. Auth., 7258 Index 18698/04,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided , January 19, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Injured party was improperly permitted to file notice of claim against New York City Housing Authority and city outside the 90-day limitation period in N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e(1)(a) because he failed to substantiate with medical records his claim that physical and emotional disabilities precluded him from contacting attorney for over four months.
|
|||||
| Matter of Schmell, M-2243,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was disbarred for undisputed misconduct that ranged from conversion of client funds to commingling funds, to misappropriating escrow funds, in addition to other misconduct.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
