In reversing the verdict for the defendant in a “breach of an employment contract” and “Labor Law article 6” action, the Second Department explained the proof requirements for both as follows: The elements of a cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff’s performance under […]
A forum-selection clause in a stipulation required any action necessary to enforce the terms of the stipulation be brought in Surrogate’s Court, Queens County. When a proceeding to discharge a mortgage, which was related to the stipulation, was brought in Supreme Court, Queens County, the court dismissed the proceeding with leave to renew in Surrogate’s […]
The plaintiff sued the defendant alleging the defendant conspired with plaintiff’s former husband to file a false report with the police, resulting in plaintiff’s arrest and criminal prosecution (civil conspiracy). In determining the motion court should have granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the Second Department wrote: “Although an independent cause of action for civil […]
In reinstating a jury verdict which determined a special employment relationship between plaintiff and defendant did not exist, the Second Department wrote: “Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 11 and 29(6) provide that an employee who is entitled to receive compensation benefits may not sue his or her employer in an action at law for the injuries […]
Finding that the defendant company had not demonstrated as a matter of law that plaintiff was a “special employee” within the meaning of the Workers’ Compensation Law, the Second Department explained: The protection against lawsuits brought by injured workers which is afforded to employers by Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 11 and 29(6) extends to special […]
In determining the affidavit of service of a complaint in a foreclosure action had been rebutted by the appellant’s sworn denial (requiring a hearing), the Second Department wrote: Where there is a sworn denial that a defendant was served with process, the affidavit of service is rebutted and the plaintiff must establish jurisdiction at a […]
In affirming Family Court’s determination that the child’s out-of-court statements were not sufficiently corroborated to support a finding of abuse by the father, the Second Department wrote: A child’s out-of-court statements may provide the basis for a finding of abuse if the statements are sufficiently corroborated by other evidence tending to support the reliability of […]
In finding that Family Court had jurisdiction to modify a Pennsylvania support order, the Second Department wrote: The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (hereinafter UIFSA), codified in article 5-B of the Family Court Act, provides, in pertinent part, that a party seeking to modify and/or enforce a child support order issued in another state “shall […]
The Second Department explained the hearing requirement of Criminal Procedure Law 440.46 (re: a motion for resentencing) as follows: CPL 440.46(3), provides, in pertinent part, that “[t]he provisions of section twenty three of chapter seven hundred thirty eight of the laws of two thousand four shall govern the proceedings on and determination of a motion […]
In finding that the respondent (Pitt) was a “permanent tenant” of a hotel which rented rooms to homeless persons under an agreement with the NYC Human Resources Administration (thereby entitling the respondent to the protections of the Rent Stabilization Code), the First Department explained the “exception to mootness” doctrine:” As a threshold matter, we find […]
Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy