§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Jorge L. Linares, Appellant,v.Andrea W. Evans,, Respondent.

Brief

12 Cited authorities

  1. Association of Counties v. Axelrod

    78 N.Y.2d 158 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 195 times

    Argued April 30, 1991 Decided June 27, 1991 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, Paul Cheeseman, J. Peter G. Bergmann, Kathy Hirata Chin and William J. Natbony for appellant. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Clifford A. Royael, O. Peter Sherwood and Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondents. Cornelius D. Murray and David M. Cherubin for New York State Health Facilities Association, Inc., amicus curiae. Susan C. Waltman for the Greater New York

  2. Gruber

    89 N.Y.2d 225 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 135 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's definition of term to be impermissible and remanding to the Board for further proceedings

  3. Montane v. Evans

    116 A.D.3d 197 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)   Cited 78 times

    2014-03-13 In the Matter of Yotuhel MONTANE, Respondent, v. Andrea EVANS, as Chair of the Division of Parole, Appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank Brady of counsel), for appellant. Hollyer Brady, LLP, New York City (Orlee Goldfeld of counsel), for respondent. PETERS Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank Brady of counsel), for appellant. Hollyer Brady, LLP, New York City (Orlee Goldfeld of counsel), for respondent. Before: PETERS, P.J., STEIN, McCARTHY and

  4. In re Maron

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 8573 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 69 times
    Finding link between legislative and judicial pay increases unconstitutional under New York state constitution

  5. Garfield v. Evans

    108 A.D.3d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 50 times

    2013-07-3 In the Matter of Andre GARFIELD, Appellant, v. Andrea EVANS, as Chair of the Division of Parole, Respondent. Andre Garfield, Sonyea, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank K. Walsh of counsel), for respondent. Andre Garfield, Sonyea, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Frank K. Walsh of counsel), for respondent. Before: ROSE, J.P., SPAIN, McCARTHY and GARRY, JJ. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (LaBuda, J.), entered

  6. Kuppersmith v. Dowling

    93 N.Y.2d 90 (N.Y. 1999)   Cited 61 times
    Finding regulation prohibiting physicians from recommending the number of hours of home care not arbitrary and capricious; declining to create judicial presumption in favor of treating physician's estimate regarding number of hours of home care services required

  7. County of Oneida v. Berle

    49 N.Y.2d 515 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 46 times
    In Berle we "recognized the Governor's constitutional obligation to propose a balanced budget," but there had been no suggestion that "once a budget plan is enacted, revenues and expenditures must match throughout the fiscal year."

  8. Burke's Auto v. Ameruso

    113 A.D.2d 198 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)   Cited 27 times

    December 3, 1985 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, Maurice W. Grey, J. Kenneth Reiss of counsel (Giamboi, Reiss Squitieri, attorneys), for respondent. Helen P. Brown of counsel (June A. Witterschein with her on the brief; Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel, attorney), for appellant. KASSAL, J. Petitioner had submitted a bid on contract T83-142/AT, to perform emergency tow and repair service on the Bruckner Expressway from Balcom Avenue to the New England Thruway, New England

  9. Matter of Rocco v. Board of Trustees

    98 A.D.2d 609 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)   Cited 3 times

    December 1, 1983 Order, Supreme Court, New York County (H. Gabel, J.), entered February 23, 1982, granting petitioner's application for leave to renew, and upon such renewal granting the CPLR article 78 petition to the extent of remanding the matter to the medical board for consideration of all available evidence, is unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and the petition is dismissed. Petitioner had a history of extraordinary abuse of sick

  10. People ex Rel. Burby v. Howland

    155 N.Y. 270 (N.Y. 1898)   Cited 97 times
    In People ex rel. Burby v. Howland (155 N.Y. 270) the court said: "Not only is the office itself placed beyond the reach of hostile legislation, but also the term thereof, the method of filling it, and, by implication, the method of removing an incumbent.

  11. Section 8002.3 - Post-interview requirements and considerations

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 9 § 8002.3   Cited 93 times

    (a) Granting of Release. If the Board grants the inmate release following its interview and deliberations, it shall impose the initial set of conditions that will govern his or her community supervision in accordance with the pertinent provisions of article 12-b of the Executive Law. (b) Denial of Release. If parole is not granted, the inmate shall be informed in writing, within two weeks of his or her interview, of the decision denying him or her parole and the factors and reasons for such denial

  12. Section 8002.1 - Parole release interview

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 9 § 8002.1   Cited 18 times

    (a) Each inmate shall be scheduled for a parole release inter view at least one month prior to the expiration of the minimum period of imprisonment or parole eligibility date as fixed by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, or upon such reconsideration date as previously set by the Board of Parole ("Board"). (b) The parole release interview shall be conducted by a pane l of at least two members of the Board. (c) The panel conducting the parole release interview shall discuss with