In a full-fledged opinion by Justice Tom, the First Department determined that, with respect to “enterprise corruption,” the term “criminal enterprise” (Penal Law 460.10[3]) requires “a continuity of existence, structure and criminal purpose beyond the scope of individual criminal incidents”…, not criminal “participants[.]” The case involved fraudulent billing of insurers by the defendants who were […]
The First Department noted that the four-year statute of limitations for rent-overcharge actions does not apply where fraud in involved, because the fraud renders the underlying lease void: We are not persuaded that plaintiffs’ overcharge claim is barred by the four-year statute of limitations. As we noted in Matter of Grimm v State of N.Y. […]
The Third Department annulled a determination that was based upon hearsay which had not been assessed for reliability: While hearsay evidence may constitute substantial evidence to support a determination of guilt, it must be sufficiently detailed to allow the Hearing Officer to independently assess its reliability and credibility … . The basis for the […]
The Third Department reversed a determination of guilt because the petitioner was removed from the hearing without sufficient justification: “An inmate has a fundamental right to be present during a prison disciplinary hearing unless he or she is excluded for reasons of institutional safety or correctional goals” … . Petitioner here was first warned that […]
The Third Department affirmed a guilty determination even though the hearing was conducted in the inmate’s absence. The inmate had a history of assaults and menacing conduct: It is well settled that an inmate has a fundamental right to be present at a disciplinary hearing, unless “he or she refuses to attend, or is excluded […]
The Third Department vacated defendant’s plea to forgery because, during the plea allocution, the defendant indicated he signed his own name on the credit card receipts. Signing one’s own name cannot constitute forgery: Although defendant waived his right to appeal and did not preserve his challenge to the voluntariness of his plea by moving to […]
The Third Department vacated defendant’s sentence because County Court promised the sentence would not include a fine, but County Court imposed a fine because a fine was required by law. The court wrote: Defendant pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him with two counts of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first […]
In finding there was insufficient evidence to determine if claimant was entitled to be paid workers’ compensation benefits from the Special Fund (for previously closed cases), the Third Department wrote: “Worker’s Compensation Law § 25-a provides for the transfer of liability to the Special Fund ‘when an application to reopen a closed case is made […]
In affirming the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s determination claimant had good cause for leaving her employment, the Third Department wrote: “Whether a claimant has good cause to leave his or her employment is a factual determination to be made by the Board, and its decision will not be disturbed when supported by substantial evidence” … […]
In affirming the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s determination claimant was an employee of a company (Eden Technologies) which provides computer-training personnel to clients, the Third Department wrote: The existence of an employer-employee relationship is a factual determination for the Board to resolve and its determination will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence … […]
Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy