§Why CasetextPricing

Maria Auqui,, et al., Respondents,v.Seven Thirty One Limited Partnership, et al., Appellants.

Brief

26 Cited authorities

  1. Ryan v. New York Tel. Co.

    62 N.Y.2d 494 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 1,611 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for an issue to be deemed identical “it must be the point actually to be determined in the second action or proceeding such that a different judgment in the second would destroy or impair rights or interests established by the first.”

  2. Kaufman v. Lilly Co.

    65 N.Y.2d 449 (N.Y. 1985)   Cited 997 times
    Recognizing that the doctrine is "based upon the general notion that it is not fair to permit a party to relitigate an issue that has already been decided against it"

  3. D'Arata v. N Y Cent. Fire Ins. Co.

    76 N.Y.2d 659 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 611 times
    Holding that collateral estoppel is grounded on concepts of fairness and should not be rigidly or mechanically applied

  4. Gilberg v. Barbieri

    53 N.Y.2d 285 (N.Y. 1981)   Cited 430 times
    Concluding conviction for petty offense of harassment did not preclude defendant from contesting merits of subsequent civil suit for assault where defendant did not have incentive to litigate thoroughly in prior action given the "minor" significance of the petty violation, the lack of a right to a jury trial, the lack of vigor typical of the defense of such violations, and the lack of any indication that the parties anticipated the determination would be used against defendant in later litigation

  5. Jeffreys v. Griffin

    1 N.Y.3d 34 (N.Y. 2003)   Cited 217 times
    Holding that under New York law "issue preclusion gives conclusive effect to an administrative agency's quasi-judicial determination when two basic conditions are met: the issue sought to be precluded is identical to a material issue necessarily decided by the administrative agency in a prior proceeding; and there was a full and fair opportunity to contest this issue in the administrative tribunal"

  6. Kingsbrook v. Allstate

    61 A.D.3d 13 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 161 times
    Stating that "[j]udicial notice has never been strictly limited to the constitutions, resolutions, ordinances, and regulations of government, but has been applied by case law to other public documents that are generated in a manner which assures their reliability," including "material derived from official government Web sites . . ."

  7. Matter of Juan C. v. Cortines

    89 N.Y.2d 659 (N.Y. 1997)   Cited 213 times
    Holding that collateral estoppel should not apply as parties were not in "legal or practical privity"

  8. Bansbach v. Zinn

    1 N.Y.3d 1 (N.Y. 2003)   Cited 158 times
    Holding that a complaint must allege with particularity that a majority of the managers is interested in the challenged transaction or controlled by a self-interested director

  9. Water Co. v. Fire Dist

    72 N.Y.2d 147 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 199 times
    Finding collateral estoppel inapplicable where defendant was not a party to the earlier proceeding

  10. Matter of Albano v. Kirby

    36 N.Y.2d 526 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 233 times

    Argued March 19, 1975 Decided May 7, 1975 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, JOSEPH LIFF, J. Frederick Fagelson for appellant. George W. Percy, Jr., County Attorney (Patrick A. Sweeney of counsel), for respondents. COOKE, J. We review here the discharge of a social services investigator at the end of his 16th week of service, following his appointment from a competitive civil service list for a probationary term of 26 weeks, under county civil