Cases

In an action to recover *353damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated April 18, 2002, which denied her motion to vacate a prior order of the same court, dated March 14, 2002, which, upon her failure to appear in opposition, inter alia, granted the cross motion of the defendant Associates Leasing RD, in effect, for summary

208 F.Supp.2d 170 (2002) Noris A. CAMPOS-MATOS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. EVANSTONE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al, Defendants. Civil No. 96-2477(JAG). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. June 19, 2002. Antonio Bauza-Torres, Cond. Le Mans, Hato Rey, PR, Zygmunt G. Slominski, Ledgewood, NJ, for plaintiffs. Edgardo A. Vega-Lopez, Isabel J. Velez-Serrano, Jimen

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Weiss, J.), dated May 23, 2011, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied. The plaintiff allegedly slipp

When a party moves pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside a verdict as unsupported by legally sufficient evidence and for judgment as a matter of law, the court must determine “whether There is simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial’ ” (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 48-49 [1994], quoting

*878Contrary to the petitioner’s contentions, the findings and conclusions of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Brookhaven (hereinafter the Board) were amply supported by the evidence in the record, and its determination to deny the substantial variances requested by the petitioner was not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Pecoraro v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempste

*888Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court did not err in granting the motion of the plaintiff Jesus Taveras (hereinafter the plaintiff) for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of whether he sustained a serious injury in the subject motor vehicle accident. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendants, as we must, we find that there is no rational proces

In a legal malpractice action, a plaintiff must show that the defendant attorney “failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable *910skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession” and that “the attorney’s breach of this professional duty caused the plaintiff’s actual damages” (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301-302 [2002] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Islip, dated November 13, 2007, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioners’ application for a variance to construct a wall on their property line, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Whelan, J.), dated May 14, 2008, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Ordered th

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Weinstein, J.), dated August 8, 2007, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated June 27, 2007, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of gang assault in the second degree and menacing in the third

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McGann, J.), rendered March 21, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. By decision and order of this Court dated July 8, 2008, the appeal was held in abeyance and the matter was remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, to hear and report on the defendant’s challen

*872The mother and the father, who never married, have one child together. In 1996 the mother commenced a proceeding against the father in the Family Court, Kings County, seeking an order of support for the child. In response to the petition, the father claimed that he was disabled and awaiting the receipt of Social Security disability benefits. The Hearing Examiner determined th

754 F.Supp. 1526 (1990) Nancy ARMIJO, as personal representative of the Estate of Luz Armijo, deceased, Plaintiff, v. The ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. No. CIV 89-293 SC. United States District Court, D. New Mexico. November 16, 1990. *1527 Chris Key, Albuquerque, N.M., for Ar

OPINION OF THE COURT Memorandum. Judgment reversed without costs and matter remanded to the *109court below for a new trial limited to the issue of damages in accordance with the decision herein. To establish a cause of action for false imprisonment, “the plaintiff must show that: (1) the defendant intended to confine him, (2) the plaintif

OPINION ESPINOSA, Judge. ¶ 1 In consolidated cases, Appellant Southwest Non-Profit Housing Corporation (Southwest) appeals trial court decisions in favor of three defendant appraisers, James E. Nowak II (Nowak), Kathleen Kniffen (Kniffen), and John T. Martell (Martell), whom Southwest alleged had conducted appraisals negligently, resulting in lost home s

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON May 24, 2012 Session BEACH COMMUNITY BANK v. EDWARD A. LABRY, III, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-005144-09, Div. 5-J Kay S. Robilio, Judge No. W2011-01583-COA-R3-CV - Filed June 15, 2012 This case involves personal guaranties on a loan to purchase real estate. The Appellants e

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-05-00345-CR Leonardo

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-05-00345-CR Leonardo Martinez, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 3041030, HONORABLE BRENDA KENNEDY, JUDGE PRESIDING OPINION

212 S.W.3d 411 (2006) Leonardo MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 03-05-00345-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin. June 9, 2006. Discretionary Review Refused January 10, 2007. *414 Kristin M. Etter, Sumpter & Gonzalez, LLP, Austin, for Appellant. Georgette Hogarth, Asst. Dist.

577 P.2d 1237 (1978) 91 N.M. 591 Mrs. Manuel APODACA, formerly Trini Moya, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. TOME LAND AND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY (NSL) et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 11195. Supreme Court of New Mexico. March 14, 1978. Rehearing Denied May 8, 1978. *1239 Ortega, Snead &

191 P.3d 521 (2008) 2008-NMSC-048 STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin SAIZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 29,386. Supreme Court of New Mexico. July 22, 2008. *524 Albright Law & Consulting, Jennifer Rebecca Albright, Albuquerque, NM, for Appellant. Gary K. King, Attorney General, Andre