§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Empire Center for New York State Policy, Appellant,v.New York State Teachers' Retirement System, Respondent.

Brief

23 Cited authorities

  1. Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Properties

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7480 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 373 times
    In Roberts, this Court rejected DHCR's long-standing statutory interpretation and concluded that luxury deregulation was unavailable in any building during receipt of J–51 benefits (13 N.Y.3d at 285–287, 890 N.Y.S.2d 388, 918 N.E.2d 900).

  2. Gould v. New York City Police Department

    89 N.Y.2d 267 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 406 times
    In Matter of Gould v. New York City Police Dept. (89 N.Y.2d 267, 274-275), the Court of Appeals noted that "[a]ll government records are * * * presumptively open for public inspection and copying" under FOIL "unless they fall within one of the enumerated exemptions of Public Officers Law § 87(2)".

  3. National Ass'n of Retired Fed. Emp. v. Horner

    879 F.2d 873 (D.C. Cir. 1989)   Cited 401 times
    Holding that courts cannot "ignore the impact on personal privacy of the more general disclosure that will likely ensue"

  4. Data Tree v. Romaine

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9906 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 179 times
    In Data Tree, a commercial enterprise requested that the Suffolk County Clerk provide it with certain real property records in electronic form.

  5. Capital Newspapers v. Burns

    67 N.Y.2d 562 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 292 times
    In Matter of Capital Newspapers v. Burns, 67 N.Y.2d 562, 505 N.Y.S.2d 576, 496 N.E.2d 665 (Ct.App.1986), the Court of Appeals stated that " the legislative intent underlying the enactment of Civil Rights Law § 50-a was narrowly specific, ‘ to prevent time-consuming and perhaps vexatious investigation into irrelevant collateral matters in the context of a civil or criminal action.’ "

  6. Matter of Fink v. Lefkowitz

    47 N.Y.2d 567 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 300 times
    Noting that FOIL "established a general policy [in favor of] disclosure"

  7. New York Times Co. v. Regenhard

    4 N.Y.3d 477 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 125 times
    Recognizing that a right of privacy exists in the affairs of the dead

  8. Long v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.

    692 F.3d 185 (2d Cir. 2012)   Cited 97 times
    Holding that employees of sensitive federal agencies, including the Secret Service, have a privacy interest in keeping their names and duty-stations from being disclosed under Exemption 6

  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. Encore College Bookstores, Inc. v. Auxiliary Service Corp.

    87 N.Y.2d 410 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 99 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Argued November 28, 1995 Decided December 27, 1995 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, William P. McCooe, J. Joseph A. Faraldo, Kew Gardens, for appellant. Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn Berman, New York City (Suzanne M. Berger and James M. Altman of counsel), for Auxiliary Service Corporation of the State University of New York at Farmingdale, respondent. Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, New York City (John P. Dellera, Victoria A. Graffeo

  11. Section 89 - General provisions relating to access to records; certain cases

    N.Y. Pub. Off. Law § 89   Cited 931 times
    Disapproving unconsented-to release of employment and medical information in public records

  12. Section 84 - Legislative declaration

    N.Y. Pub. Off. Law § 84   Cited 538 times
    Declaring that the public “should have access to the records of government in accordance with the provisions of this article”