Search for: "Baker Realty Co. v. Baker" Results 1 - 20 of 22
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 May 2015, 3:24 pm
Riverbridge Realty Co., 227 A.D.2d 430, 642 N.Y.S.2d 692). [read post]
23 May 2015, 2:09 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Riverbridge Realty Co., 227 A.D.2d 430, 642 N.Y.S.2d 692). [read post]
28 May 2015, 3:24 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Riverbridge Realty Co., 227 A.D.2d 430, 642 N.Y.S.2d 692). [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 6:33 am
"The plaintiff failed to allege any facts from which malice could be inferred and [her] conclusory allegations of malice were insufficient to overcome the privilege" (Red Cap Valet v Hotel Nikko [USA], 273 AD2d 289, 290; see Rohrlich v Consolidated Bus Tr., Inc., 15 AD3d at 562; Serratore v American Port Servs., 293 AD2d 464; Freidman v Ergin, 110 AD2d 620, affd 66 NY2d 645; see also Breytman v Olinville Realty, LLC, 54 AD3d 703, 704;… [read post]
9 Sep 2019, 4:13 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Fund Co., Inc., 145 AD3d 648, 649 [2016]; Kantor v Leisure Glen Homeowners Assn., Inc., 95 AD3d at 1177; Ali v Village of Pleasantville, 95 AD3d 796, 797 [2012]). [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 4:28 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Fund Co., Inc., 145 AD3d 648, 649; Kantor v Leisure Glen Homeowners Assn., Inc., 95 AD3d at 1177; Ali v Village of Pleasantville, 95 AD3d 796, 797). [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 4:25 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In contrast, the standards of specificity for legal malpractice, like most other causes of action, are governed by principles of notice pleading, which “are designed to focus attention on whether the pleader has a cause of action rather than on whether he [or she] has properly stated one” (Rovello v Orofino Realty Co., 40 NY2d 633, 636 [1976] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; accord Gagnon v City of Saratoga Springs, 14 AD3d 845,… [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 10:52 am by Maureen Johnston
Ambler Realty Co.; and (2) whether a regulatory restriction on the right to use one's property “must substantially advance a legitimate state interest” to satisfy the substantive requirement of due process, per Lingle, Nectow, and Euclid. [read post]