§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Katie Kickertz, Respondent,v.New York University, Appellant.

Brief

36 Cited authorities

  1. Vega v. Restani Constr. Corp.

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1148 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 2,797 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming denial of summary judgment

  2. Pell v. Board of Education

    34 N.Y.2d 222 (N.Y. 1974)   Cited 5,554 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Discussing the standard of review in an Article 78 appeal

  3. Matter of Kelly v. Safir

    96 N.Y.2d 32 (N.Y. 2001)   Cited 398 times
    Confirming penalty of dismissal despite prior exemplary service and commendations

  4. 805 Third Ave. Co. v. M.W. Realty Associates

    58 N.Y.2d 447 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 232 times

    Argued February 9, 1983 Decided March 31, 1983 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, ANDREW R. TYLER, J. Richard E. Hershenson and Samuel Kirschenbaum for appellant. Jay A. Kranis, Thomas J. Malmud and Barbara L. Levine for respondent. SIMONS, J. In September, 1979 plaintiff, 805 Third Avenue Co., and defendant, M.W. Realty Associates, two limited partnerships, entered into a contract for the sale by defendant of a portion of its air rights to plaintiff

  5. Tedeschi v. Wagner College

    49 N.Y.2d 652 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 188 times
    Holding that "when a university has adopted a rule or guideline establishing the procedure to be followed in relation to suspension or expulsion that procedure must be substantially observed"

  6. Council of Teachers v. Boces

    63 N.Y.2d 100 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 162 times

    Decided September 20, 1984 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Bernard McCaffrey, J. Stanley A. Immerman for appellant. Seymour H. Kligler for Board of Cooperative Educational Services of Nassau County, respondent. MEYER, J. When the respondent in an article 78 proceeding challenges petitioner's standing only, it is error to dismiss the petition on the merits prior to service of respondent's answer. The mandate of CPLR 7804 (subd [f]) that, "If

  7. Olsson v. Bd. of Higher Educ

    49 N.Y.2d 408 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 178 times
    Recognizing judicial reluctance to intervene in controversies involving academic standards

  8. Matter of Susan M v. Law School

    76 N.Y.2d 241 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 118 times
    Holding that strong policy considerations militate against courts intervening in controversies relating to educational institution's judgment of student's academic performance

  9. Rich v. Lefkovits

    56 N.Y.2d 276 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 136 times
    Finding that a defense to personal jurisdiction was not waived where the plaintiff challenged service of process "by affirmative defense asserted in the answer, after a stipulation extending defendant's time 'to appear and answer.'"

  10. O'Hara v. Del Bello

    47 N.Y.2d 363 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 85 times
    Requiring the person who commences a class action to move for permission to maintain the action as a class action within 60 days after the time for service of a responsive pleading has expired.

  11. Section 500.11 - Alternative procedure for selected appeals

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.11   Cited 536 times

    (a) On its own motion, the court may review selected appeals by an alternative procedure. Such appeals shall be determined on the intermediate appellate court record or appendix and briefs, the writings in the courts below and additional letter submissions on the merits. The clerk of the court shall notify all parties by letter when an appeal has been selected for review pursuant to this section. Appellant may request such review in its preliminary appeal statement. Respondent may request such review