Search for: "J.P." Results 1 - 20 of 2,234
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 May 2024, 10:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Dan v City of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02659Decided on May 14, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 14, 2024Before: Oing, J.P., González, Kennedy, Higgitt, O'Neill Levy, JJ.Index No. 21313/16 Appeal No. 2265 Case No. 2023-03010[*1]Janet Dan, Appellant,vCity of New… [read post]
15 May 2024, 10:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Dan v City of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02659Decided on May 14, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 14, 2024Before: Oing, J.P., González, Kennedy, Higgitt, O'Neill Levy, JJ.Index No. 21313/16 Appeal No. 2265 Case No. 2023-03010[*1]Janet Dan, Appellant,vCity of New… [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 Matter of Davis v Schley2024 NY Slip Op 02614Decided on May 10, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 10, 2024Before: Moulton, J.P., Scarpulla, Shulman, Higgitt, O'Neill-Levy, JJ.Index No. 153380/24 Appeal No. 2415 Case No. 2024-02974[*1]In the Matter of Londel… [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 Matter of Davis v Schley2024 NY Slip Op 02614Decided on May 10, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 10, 2024Before: Moulton, J.P., Scarpulla, Shulman, Higgitt, O'Neill-Levy, JJ.Index No. 153380/24 Appeal No. 2415 Case No. 2024-02974[*1]In the Matter of Londel… [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Dist.)2024 NY Slip Op 02429Decided on May 3, 2024Appellate Division, Fourth DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided on May 3, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial DepartmentPRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CURRAN, MONTOUR, DELCONTE, AND KEANE, JJ.224 CA 23-00699[*1]BUFFALO… [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Dist.)2024 NY Slip Op 02429Decided on May 3, 2024Appellate Division, Fourth DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided on May 3, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial DepartmentPRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CURRAN, MONTOUR, DELCONTE, AND KEANE, JJ.224 CA 23-00699[*1]BUFFALO… [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Auth.2024 NY Slip Op 02510Decided on May 07, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 07, 2024Before: Webber, J.P., Moulton, Friedman, González, Mendez, JJ.Index No. 152047/23 Appeal No. 2220 Case No. 2023-06721[*1]In the Matter of Miguel Rijos, Respondent,vNew York City… [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Auth.2024 NY Slip Op 02510Decided on May 07, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 07, 2024Before: Webber, J.P., Moulton, Friedman, González, Mendez, JJ.Index No. 152047/23 Appeal No. 2220 Case No. 2023-06721[*1]In the Matter of Miguel Rijos, Respondent,vNew York City… [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
7 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
However, his reasons for walking on the floor despite the warnings are irrelevant since a slip and fall would not be unexpected in the circumstances.A remand to the Trustees is not warranted since they considered the statements of the three witnesses, which were consistent, and petitioner did not deny that their account of the incident was accurate (see Matter of McCartan v Shea, 211 AD3d 534, 535 [1st Dept 2022]).THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION,… [read post]
7 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
However, his reasons for walking on the floor despite the warnings are irrelevant since a slip and fall would not be unexpected in the circumstances.A remand to the Trustees is not warranted since they considered the statements of the three witnesses, which were consistent, and petitioner did not deny that their account of the incident was accurate (see Matter of McCartan v Shea, 211 AD3d 534, 535 [1st Dept 2022]).THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION,… [read post]