§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Gaudenzia Hroncich, Respondent,v.Con Edison et al., Appellants, Special Disability Fund, Respondent. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.

Brief

37 Cited authorities

  1. Williams v. Taylor

    529 U.S. 362 (2000)   Cited 37,780 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding that counsel's performance was deficient when their investigation failed to uncover "extensive records" filled with mitigation evidence concerning the defendant's family history, education, mental health, and rehabilitation

  2. United States v. Menasche

    348 U.S. 528 (1955)   Cited 742 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting an interpretation of a statutory provision that would nullify the effect of another provision

  3. Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n v. City of New York

    41 N.Y.2d 205 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 408 times

    Argued October 12, 1976 Decided December 22, 1976 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, GEORGE STARKE, J. W. Bernard Richland, Corporation Counsel (James G. Greilsheimer and L. Kevin Sheridan of counsel), New York City, for appellant. Frederick R. Livingston, Jay W. Waks and William C. Zifchak, New York City, for respondent. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (George D. Zuckerman and Samuel A. Hirshowitz of counsel), New York City, for intervenor

  4. Sanders v. Winship

    57 N.Y.2d 391 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 191 times
    Holding that all parts of the statute should be harmonized and given its full effect and meaning if possible

  5. People v. Mobil Oil Corp.

    48 N.Y.2d 192 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 148 times
    Posting of signs

  6. Mtr. of Belmonte v. Snashall

    2 N.Y.3d 560 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 62 times
    Observing that agency interpretation is entitled to deference if interpretation involves “some type of specialized knowledge,” but that no deference is warranted where “the question is one of pure statutory reading and analysis”

  7. Matter of Bliss v. Bliss

    66 N.Y.2d 382 (N.Y. 1985)   Cited 68 times
    In Bliss v. Bliss, 66 N.Y.2d 382, 497 N.Y.S.2d 344, 488 N.E.2d 90 (1985), the court unanimously held that evidence that a former wife “habitually lived with another man” and that “the individuals may conform to the life style of a married couple is not enough” to warrant a modification in maintenance.

  8. Zechmann v. Canisteo Fire

    85 N.Y.2d 747 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 30 times

    Argued April 25, 1995 Decided June 8, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department. Morris N. Lissauer, New York City, for appellant. Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, New York City (Howard B. Friedland, Victoria A. Graffeo, Peter H. Schiff, Jane Lauer Barker and Theresa E. Wolinski of counsel), for Workers' Compensation Board, respondent. Chief Judge KAYE. The New York workers' compensation statute, like many across the country, provides for continuing

  9. Montclair v. Ramsdell

    107 U.S. 147 (1882)   Cited 304 times
    In Montclair v. Ramsdell, 107 U.S. 147, Otoe County v. Baldwin, 111 U.S. 1, 16, and Ackley School District v. Hall, 113 U.S. 135, we had occasion to consider the same general question, with the same result, in connection with similar provisions in the constitutions of New Jersey, Nebraska and Iowa respectively.

  10. Claim of Bruno v. Kelly Temp Service

    301 A.D.2d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 17 times

    92364 Decided and Entered: January 2, 2003. Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed November 26, 2001, which ruled that apportionment applied to claimant's workers' compensation award. Segar Sciortino, Rochester (Stephen A. Segar of counsel), for appellant. Hamberger Weiss, Rochester (Ronald E. Weiss of counsel), for Kelly Temp Service and another, respondents. Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Mugglin and, Lahtinen, JJ. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Crew III, J. In 1997, claimant

  11. Section 500.1 - General requirements

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) All papers shall comply with applicable statutes and rules, particularly the signing requirement of section 130-1.1 -a of this Title. (b) Papers filed. Papers filed means briefs, papers submitted pursuant to sections 500.10 and 500.11 of this Part, motion papers, records and appendices. (c) Method of reproduction. All papers filed may be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black image on white paper. Reproduction on both sides of the paper is encouraged. (d) Designation