§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of County of Jefferson, Appellant,v.Nirav R. Shah,, et al., Respondents.

Brief

22 Cited authorities

  1. Matter of Scherbyn v. Boces

    77 N.Y.2d 753 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 530 times
    Finding that Article 78 review of a quasi-judicial hearing is a certiorari proceeding, not a mandamus to review proceeding, and therefore "substantial evidence" rather than "arbitrary and capricious" is the standard of review

  2. Simonds v. Simonds

    45 N.Y.2d 233 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 561 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an interest obtained through an agreement supported by consideration “is superior to that of a named beneficiary who has given no consideration”

  3. 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.

  4. Matter of Gross v. Perales

    72 N.Y.2d 231 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 267 times
    Finding that incidental damages are money that the agency is required to pay upon the annulment or nullification of the underlying administrative action, i.e., the agency would still have been obligated to reimburse the petitioner even had the petitioner not requested it

  5. Madura v. State

    12 A.D.3d 759 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 156 times

    95667 November 4, 2004. Carpinello, J. Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Collins, J.), entered October 3, 2003, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Before: Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Claimant unsuccessfully applied for federal grant money to recover for losses she allegedly incurred as an Orange County onion farmer between crop years 1996 and 2000. Her application was premised upon Farm Security and Rural

  6. Stiver v. Good

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9062 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 143 times
    Holding defendant cannot be said to have launched an instrument of harm because there is no evidence that condition was made less safe

  7. City of New York v. State

    46 A.D.3d 1168 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 120 times

    No. 502508. December 20, 2007. Appeals (1) from an order of the Court of Claims (Collins, J.), entered July 19, 2006, which, among other things, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the claim, and (2) from an order of said court, entered March 5, 2007, which, upon reargument, adhered to its prior decision, among other things, denying claimants' motion pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10 (6) for permission to file a late claim. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Julian L. Kalkstein

  8. 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"

  9. Certiorari Granted

    531 U.S. 1079 (2001)   Cited 38 times
    Holding that statistical evidence of disparity within a police department coupled with anecdotal evidence of discrimination sufficiently establishes a compelling state interest that justifies an affirmative action plan

  10. Ozanam Hall of Queens Nursing Home, Inc. v. State

    241 A.D.2d 670 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)   Cited 122 times

    July 10, 1997 Appeal from the Court of Claims (McNamara, J.). Public Health Law § 2807-d (2) (b) imposes a 1.8% "assessment" on the gross receipts from all patient care services and other operating income of certain health care providers, including nursing homes. The assessment is to be paid monthly, 15 days following the end of the calendar month to which the assessment applies. The statute provides for interest and penalty to be assessed on certain late payments and the underpayment of estimated