31 Cited authorities

  1. Godfrey v. Spano

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 8474 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 198 times
    Holding that executive orders directing county and state civil services to recognize out of state same sex marriages were lawful; concurrence would have applied recognition of marriage doctrine to same-sex marriages that are valid where performed
  2. National Ass'n of Retired Fed. Emp. v. Horner

    879 F.2d 873 (D.C. Cir. 1989)   Cited 342 times
    Holding that courts cannot "ignore the impact on personal privacy of the more general disclosure that will likely ensue"
  3. Dubois et al. v. Hocking

    494 U.S. 1078 (1990)   Cited 77 times
    Holding that, after the mortgage insurance proceeds have been paid and the claims have been assigned by the mortgagee, HUD assumes all rights of the original lender
  4. Hopkins v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

    929 F.2d 81 (2d Cir. 1991)   Cited 198 times
    Holding that disclosure of names and addresses sought "would shed no light on HUD's performance in enforcing the prevailing wage laws"
  5. Matter of Fink v. Lefkowitz

    47 N.Y.2d 567 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 276 times
    Noting that FOIL "established a general policy [in favor of] disclosure"
  6. Amorosi v. South Colonie Independent Central School District

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9904 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 94 times
    Holding that "the one-year limitation prescribed in Education Law § 3813(2-b) should govern discrimination claims against a school district"
  7. Kahn v. New York City Dep't of Educ.

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1098 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 57 times
    Affirming Appellate Division ruling that probationary teacher did not have a valid claim under Section 1983 because she did not have a property interest in her position
  8. In re N.Y. City Tran. Auth. v. Transp. Workers Union

    2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 1378 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 49 times
    Holding arbitrator has power to decide whether "clearly excessive" exception of Article II, section 2.1.C.19.c applies
  9. Buffalo News v. Buffalo Enter

    84 N.Y.2d 488 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 71 times
    Holding a not-for-profit corporation that administered loan programs and encouraged community development, though not subject to substantial governmental control over its daily operations, was still a "government entity" performing a governmental function and thus an "agency" subject to FOIL
  10. Kahn v. New York City Depar

    79 A.D.3d 521 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)   Cited 34 times

    No. 3592. December 14, 2010. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about September 8, 2009, which denied respondents' motion to dismiss the petition, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Julian L. Kalkstein of counsel), for appellants. New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York (Adriana C. Piñon of counsel), for respondent. James R. Sandner, New York (Wendy M. Star