Search for: "Myers v. Maas" Results 1 - 5 of 5
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Jan 2019, 9:16 pm
,  several  months after the submission of the MAA for elotuzumab. [read post]
18 Feb 2020, 4:46 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
However, “allegations consisting of bare legal conclusions as well as factual claims flatly contradicted by documentary evidence are not entitled to any such consideration” (Maas v Cornell Univ., 94 NY2d 87, 91 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Myers v Schneiderman, 30 NY3d 1, 11). [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 4:35 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Nor do we believe that our decision will lead to unpredictability or confusion given that it reiterates the proposition that bare legal conclusions in a pleading are not entitled to consideration when assessing a motion to dismiss under CPLR 3211 (a) (7) (see Myers v Schneiderman, 30 NY3d 1, 11 [2017]; Connaughton v Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 29 NY3d at 141; Maas v Cornell Univ., 94 NY2d 87, 91 [1999]; Rodriguez v Jacoby &… [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 4:30 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
At the same time, however, “allegations consisting of bare legal conclusions as well as factual claims flatly contradicted by documentary evidence are not entitled to any such consideration” (Maas v Cornell Univ., 94 NY2d 87, 91 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Myers v Schneiderman, 30 NY3d 1, 11; Sweeney v Sweeney, 71 AD3d 989, 991). [read post]