Search for: "3 NY3d 1"
Results 421 - 440
of 663
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Feb 2023, 5:30 am
In Islip "we merely acknowledged that PERB had determined that 'employee use of an employer-owned vehicle for transportation to and from work is an economic benefit and a mandatorily negotiable term and condition of employment' (see 23 NY3d at 491). [read post]
28 May 2024, 6:00 am
Decided on May 1, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department ANGELA G. [read post]
28 May 2024, 6:00 am
Decided on May 1, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department ANGELA G. [read post]
16 Feb 2023, 5:30 am
In Islip "we merely acknowledged that PERB had determined that 'employee use of an employer-owned vehicle for transportation to and from work is an economic benefit and a mandatorily negotiable term and condition of employment' (see 23 NY3d at 491). [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 2:53 pm
While "[z]oning laws must be [*3]enacted in accordance with a comprehensive land use plan" (Rocky Point Drive-In, L.P. v Town of Brookhaven, 21 NY3d 729, ___, 2013 NY Slip Op 07513, *2 n 1 [2013]; see Town Law § 263), to establish compliance, "respondents need only show that the zoning amendment was adopted for 'a legitimate governmental purpose'" and the amendment will not be considered arbitrary unless "'there is no reasonable relation between the end sought to be… [read post]
7 Jul 2012, 7:57 am
James, 132 A.D.2d 932, 933 ), the Court of Appeals has restricted the use of reconstruction hearings to establish a record (People v Velasquez, 1 NY3d 44 [2003] ["Reconstruction hearings may be appropriate where it is clear that a proceeding took place that was not transcribed ( see e.g. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 5:26 am
The court must decide whether the proposed "testimony is (1)relevant to the witness's identification of defendant, (2) based on principles that are generally accepted within the relevant scientific community, (3) proffered by a qualified expert and (4) on a topic beyond the ken of the average juror" The court distinguished it's holding in an interim decision, People v. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 6:21 am
Generally, to recover damages for legal malpractice, a client must prove: “(1) that the [law firm] failed to exercise that degree of care, skill, and diligence commonly possessed by a member of the legal community, (2) proximate cause, (3) damages, and (4) that the [client] would have been successful in the underlying action had the [law firm] exercised due care” (Chamberlain, D’Amanda, Oppenheimer & Greenfield, LLP v Wilson, 136 AD3d 1326, 1327 [4th Dept… [read post]
26 Apr 2009, 6:17 am
Stejskal v Simons, 3 NY3d 628 (2004)(one- or two-family dwelling exception applies where the "purpose of the construction" was to convert a multi-family dwelling into a one family dwelling). [read post]
22 May 2024, 4:03 am
Petrokanksy” (NYSCEF Doc No. 103, Bruno affirmation, exhibit L, Wright 3/29/2021 aff ¶ 38), that “[a]ny alleged legal counsel all worked for Mr. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 7:24 am
A recent decision of the Kings County Surrogate’s Court[1] demonstrates the importance of thoroughly analyzing all aspects of a statute of limitations defense prior to making a dismissal motion. [read post]
28 May 2019, 4:42 am
The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies when: “(1) the issues in both proceedings are identical, (2) the issue in the prior proceeding was actually litigated and decided, (3) there was a full and fair opportunity to litigate in the prior proceeding, and (4) the issue previously litigated was necessary to support a valid and final judgment on the merits” (Conason v Megan Holding, LLC, 25 NY3d 1, 17 [internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]
7 May 2019, 4:16 am
Plaintiff was required to move back to Manhattan “no later than September 1, 2014. [read post]
21 Nov 2018, 4:31 am
Defendant now moves by order to show cause: (1) pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(4), to vacate the Order nunc pro tunc for lack of jurisdiction; pursuant to CPLR 2221(d), to reargue the Order; and (3) for an order directing Plaintiff to withdraw the action commenced as assignee (mot seq 024). [read post]
23 Mar 2022, 3:28 am
In appeal No. 3, plaintiffs appeal from an order and judgment of the same court that granted JB’s motion. [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 2:58 am
A claim for professional malpractice accrues when the malpractice is committed, not when it is discovered (see Williamson v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP, 9 NY3d 1, 7-8 [2007]), Under the continuous representation doctrine, if the accountant whose professional work is being questioned engages in continuous work for the client with respect to the particular transaction that is the subject of the action, the statutory period is tolled (see Mitschele v Schulfz, 36 AD3d 249, 253… [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 4:00 am
The court said that "[b]ased upon our review of the record as a whole, we do not find that [Zlotnick] made such a showing here.3. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 10:09 pm
Kenneth Glassman-Blanco, 2010-1471 K CR, NYLJ 1202634715715, at *1 (App. [read post]
18 Nov 2024, 6:08 am
Lipper Convertibles, L.P. v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 9 NY3d 1, 7-8 [2007]). [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 2:50 am
“ ’Collateral estoppel comes into play when four conditions are fulfilled: (1) the issues in both proceedings are identical, (2) the issue in the prior proceeding was actually litigated and decided, (3) there was a full and fair opportunity to litigate in the prior proceeding, and (4) the issue previously litigated was necessary to support a valid and final judgment on the merits’ ” (Wilson v City of New York, 161 AD3d 1212, 1216 [2018],… [read post]
