§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Vilma Lancaster, et al., Appellants,v.Incorporated Village of Freeport, et al., Respondents. (Proceeding No. 1)---------------------------------In the Matter of William F. Glacken, et al., Appellants, v. Incorporated Village of Freeport, et al., Respondents. (Proceeding No. 2)

Brief

42 Cited authorities

  1. Garcetti v. Ceballos

    547 U.S. 410 (2006)   Cited 4,010 times   62 Legal Analyses
    Holding if an employee does not speak as a citizen on a matter of public concern, "the employee has no First Amendment cause of action based on his or her employer's reaction to the speech"

  2. Perry v. Sindermann

    408 U.S. 593 (1972)   Cited 4,496 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mutually explicit understanding could give rise to protected property interest

  3. Waters v. Churchill

    511 U.S. 661 (1994)   Cited 928 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that basing a termination decision on "the word of two trusted employees, the endorsement of those employees’ reliability," and "a face-to-face meeting with the employee he fired" was reasonable and "no further time needed to be taken"

  4. Board of County Comm'rs, Wabaunsee Cty. v. Umbehr

    518 U.S. 668 (1996)   Cited 777 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the legal framework governing First Amendment retaliation claims of government employees also applies to claims brought by independent government contractors

  5. Ruotolo v. City of N.Y

    514 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2008)   Cited 2,093 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party seeking to amend pursuant to a Rule 59 or Rule 60 motion "must first have the judgment vacated or set aside" under those Rules

  6. Alexander v. United States

    509 U.S. 544 (1993)   Cited 540 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in personam criminal forfeiture is subject to the Excessive Fines Clause

  7. Lewis v. Cowen

    165 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 1999)   Cited 390 times
    Holding that a public employee did not forgo First Amendment protection when he refused to present proposed policy changes in a positive light to the Connecticut Gaming Policy Board

  8. Ezekwo v. NYC Health & Hospitals Corp.

    940 F.2d 775 (2d Cir. 1991)   Cited 438 times
    Holding that the plaintiff's “statements did not address matters of public concern” because her “complaints were personal in nature and generally related to her own situation within the HHC residency program,” including “her own reputation and individual development as a doctor”

  9. Thrasher v. U.S. Liab. Ins. Co.

    19 N.Y.2d 159 (N.Y. 1967)   Cited 371 times
    Holding that in the context of an automobile liability insurance, an assertion of the failure of an insured to cooperate cannot succeed unless "the attitude of the insured, after his co-operation was sought, was one of willful and avowed obstruction"

  10. Matter of Schulz v. State

    81 N.Y.2d 336 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 121 times
    Finding an 11-month delay unreasonable in constitutional challenge brought against the procedural enactment of public financing laws

  11. Section 51 - Prosecution of officers for illegal acts

    N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 51   Cited 356 times
    Authorizing actions by qualified taxpayers against local officers to prevent illegal official conduct, or to prevent waste or injury to the property or funds of the municipality

  12. Section 107 - Enforcement

    N.Y. Pub. Off. Law § 107   Cited 99 times

    1. Any aggrieved person shall have standing to enforce the provisions of this article against a public body by the commencement of a proceeding pursuant to article seventy-eight of the civil practice law and rules, or an action for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. In any such action or proceeding, if a court determines that a public body failed to comply with this article, the court shall have the power, in its discretion, upon good cause shown, to declare that the public body violated

  13. Section 105 - Conduct of executive sessions

    N.Y. Pub. Off. Law § 105   Cited 68 times

    1. Upon a majority vote of its total membership, taken in an open meeting pursuant to a motion identifying the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered, a public body may conduct an executive session for the below enumerated purposes only, provided, however, that no action by formal vote shall be taken to appropriate public moneys: a. matters which will imperil the public safety if disclosed; b. any matter which may disclose the identity of a law enforcement agent or informer;