Search for: "Martinez v. Leon"
Results 21 - 40
of 125
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Nov 2010, 1:49 am
Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d 314, 326; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87; Sokol v Leader, 74 AD3d 1180). [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 3:11 am
Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d 314, 326; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87; Sokol v Leader, 74 AD3d 1180). [read post]
23 Mar 2018, 4:24 am
Accepting the facts alleged in the third-party complaint as true, and according the third-party plaintiffs the benefit of every favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 88; Raach v SLSJET Mgt. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 3:19 am
Plaintiffs' expert affidavit was properly considered to remedy any defects in the complaint (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 88 [1994]). [read post]
6 May 2022, 4:12 am
“The amended complaint states a cause of action for legal malpractice and the documents submitted do not utterly refute the factual allegations underlying that cause of action (see generally Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]; Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. [read post]
8 Aug 2022, 5:46 am
” “The amended complaint states a cause of action for legal malpractice and the documents submitted do not utterly refute the factual allegations underlying that cause of action (see generally Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]; Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 4:25 am
Accepting as true the facts set forth in the complaint and according plaintiff the benefit of all favorable inferences arising therefrom, as we must in the context of the instant motion (see generally Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]), we conclude that the complaint fails to plead a cognizable theory for legal malpractice because plaintiff’s allegations do not support even an inference that any alleged negligence by defendants was a proximate cause of… [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 2:56 am
Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d at 326; see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d at 88; Robertson v Wells, 95 AD3d 862, 863; Magnus v Sklover, 95 AD3d 837, 837). [read post]
18 Feb 2020, 4:46 am
“With regard to the first cause of action, Izmirligil failed to state a cause of action under Real Property Law § 329 against the BNYM defendants and Chase (see CPLR 3211[a][7]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88). [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 5:12 am
However, the complaint, “although inartfully drafted,” (Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d at 88), adequately alleges a demand for punitive damages based on the remaining causes of action asserted against Geico (see Rocanova v Equitable Life Assur. [read post]
2 Mar 2022, 4:18 am
Therefore, at this stage, dismissal was not warranted under CPLR 3211(a)(7), or under CPLR 3211(a)(1), as defendant failed to provide documentary evidence that “conclusively establishes a defense to the asserted claims as a matter of law” (Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 88 [1994]; Amsterdam Hospitality Group, LLC v Marshall-Alan Assoc., Inc., 120 AD3d 431, 432-433 [1st Dept 2014])” [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 3:52 am
Further, in support of that branch of their motion which sought dismissal pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1), the Lyubarskys failed to sustain their burden of submitting documentary evidence to resolve all factual issues as a matter of law, and conclusively dispose of the plaintiff’s fraud cause of action as it related to the common areas of the building (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d at 87; Camisa v Papaleo, 93 AD3d at 625). [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 1:55 pm
Airbus S.A.S., 631 F.3d 1321, 1330 (11th Cir. 2011) (quoting Leon v. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 4:46 am
Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 (1994). [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 4:24 am
We find that the motion court’s dismissal of the counterclaims was proper and that defendants have not articulated any basis to disturb the motion court’s ruling (Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]). [read post]
4 Jun 2010, 3:26 am
Affording the complaint a liberal construction, and according its factual allegations every possible favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88; Shaya B. [read post]
7 Jun 2021, 5:14 am
Here, accepting as true the facts alleged in the complaint, and according the plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d at 87-88), the complaint failed to sufficiently allege a failure by the defendants to exercise the ordinary skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession and that any breach of such duty proximately caused damages (see Cali v Maio, 189 AD3d 1337). [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 5:53 pm
Martinez, 686 F. [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 4:09 am
Even as amplified by the plaintiff’s affidavit and supporting evidence, and according the plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83), the complaint failed to allege that the defendants acted “with intent to deceive the court or any party” (Judiciary Law § 487[1]; see Fleyshman v Suckle & Schlesinger, PLLC, 91 AD3d 591, 592-593; Jaroslawicz v Cohen, 12 AD3d 160,… [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 3:00 am
Even as amplified by the plaintiff's affidavit, and according the plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83), the complaint failed to allege that the defendants acted "with intent to deceive the court or any party" (Judiciary Law § 487[1]; see Jaroslawicz v Cohen, 12 AD3d 160, 160-161). [read post]
