Cohen v. Hallmark Cards
45 N.Y.2d 493 (N.Y. 1978) Cited 1,945 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that the standard of review in assessing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is whether there is "simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial"
Misicki v. Caradonna
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 3764 (N.Y. 2009) Cited 597 timesHolding that 12 N.Y.C.R.R. § 23-9.2 imposes a nondelegable duty to make "necessary repairs or replacement" upon discovery of any unsafe condition
Edenwald Contracting Co., Inc. v. City of New York
60 N.Y.2d 957 (N.Y. 1983) Cited 995 times 1 Legal AnalysesIn Edenwald Contr. Co. v City of New York (60 N.Y.2d 957), the Court of Appeals, in rejecting a 6 1/2-year delay from the commencement of the action therein as laches, stated that lateness alone is not a barrier to the amendment of pleadings since there must be significant prejudice as well (see also, Sass v Mack Trucks, 158 A.D.2d 332; Granieri v Ryder Truck Rental, 112 A.D.2d 189 [which authorized the addition of a defense some 7 1/2 years after the joinder of issue]).
Murray v. City of New York
43 N.Y.2d 400 (N.Y. 1977) Cited 476 timesHolding that workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy as a matter of substantive law, and hence, whenever it appears from the plaintiff's pleadings, bill of particulars, or the facts that the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant, the obligation of alleging and proving noncoverage or applicability of workers' compensation benefits falls on the plaintiff; the court continued, stating that waiver may be accomplished by ignoring the issue to the point of final disposition
Adamy v. Ziriakus
92 N.Y.2d 396 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 128 timesIn Adamy, plaintiff's circumstantial evidence consisted of an expert who established that defendant consumed 12 drinks prior to the accident, and the testimony of several police officers who testified that defendant had alcohol on his breath, glassy, red eyes, slurred speech, that he was unresponsive to police inquiries and that he was swaying and staggering when walking.
Whalen v. Kawasaki Motors Corp.
92 N.Y.2d 288 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 126 timesAdopting the "settlement-first" method of reducing the verdict by first reducing the verdict by the amount of the settlement and then applying N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1411 to discount the remainder by the proportion of plaintiff s comparative negligence
Josephine v. Queens
49 A.D.3d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008) Cited 92 timesNos. 2007-00677, 2007-06382. March 25, 2008. In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical mal-practice, etc., the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dollard, J.), dated December 8, 2006, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Queens Long Island Medical Group, P.C., and Neelima Phatak which was to strike certain portions of her expert disclosure pursuant to CPLR 3101 (d), and (2) so much of an order
Adams v. Genie Indus
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 4022 (N.Y. 2010) Cited 77 timesConfirming that the standard set forth in Voss v. Black & Decker [Mfg.] Co., 59 N.Y.2d 102 applies to both strict products liability and negligence claims
Koken v. Reliance Ins. Co.
586 Pa. 269 (Pa. 2006) Cited 65 timesHolding that the term "shall" is mandatory for purposes of statutory construction when the statute is unambiguous
Murray v. New York
51 A.D.3d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008) Cited 41 timesNo. 3658. May 13, 2008. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered May 2, 2007, which granted defendants' motion to amend their answer to include the affirmative defense of collateral estoppel, and granted their motion to dismiss the complaint on that ground, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Joel Murray, appellant pro se. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Julie Steiner of counsel), for respondents. Before: Saxe, J.P., Gonzalez, Nardelli and McGuire