§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Town of North Hempstead, Appellant-Respondent,v.County of Nassau, Respondent-Appellant.

Brief

67 Cited authorities

  1. Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc.

    478 U.S. 697 (1986)   Cited 271 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “the First Amendment is not implicated by the enforcement of” laws “directed at unlawful conduct having nothing to do with ... expressive activity”

  2. Klostermann v. Cuomo

    61 N.Y.2d 525 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 409 times
    In Klostermann, the public agencies involved were in repeated noncompliance with the command of Mental Hygiene Law § 29.15 (g), which required preparation of a written service plan, with prescribed contents, for every person discharged from state psychiatric hospitals.

  3. Abate v. Mundt

    403 U.S. 182 (1971)   Cited 189 times
    Holding that a local government had properly justified a local government reapportionment plan with a 11.9% maximum population deviation due to a desire to preserve political subdivisions

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

    41 N.Y.2d 205 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 407 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

  5. Commonwealth of the N. Mariana Islands v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

    2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 3018 (N.Y. 2013)   Cited 116 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase “possession or custody” in § 5225(b) requires actual, and not merely constructive, possession

  6. People v. Elmer

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 5125 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 111 times
    Recognizing that CPLR's requirement that an appeal could only be taken from a "written order" not relevant in a criminal appeal

  7. Fleming v. Graham

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 2502 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 113 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 41. Argued February 13, 2008. Decided March 20, 2008. APPEAL, by permission of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, from an order of that Court, entered November 14, 2006. The Appellate Division affirmed, insofar as appealed from, so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (David I. Schmidt, J.; op 2005 NY Slip Op 30268[U]), as had denied third-party defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint. The following

  8. Castro v. United Container Machinery Group

    96 N.Y.2d 398 (N.Y. 2001)   Cited 134 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the word 'finger' [in Section 11] means the whole finger, not just its tip"

  9. Washington Post v. Ins Dept

    61 N.Y.2d 557 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 177 times
    Stating that promises of confidentiality by a state agency do not affect the status of documents as records subject to required disclosure under FOIL, nor do such promises affect the applicability of any exemption under FOIL's provisions

  10. People v. Roe

    74 N.Y.2d 20 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 145 times
    Upholding a depraved indifference conviction where the defendant killed an unwitting victim during a "game" of "Polish Roulette."