Cases

MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER DAVID N. HURD, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Travis Woods (“plaintiff’ or “Woods”) filed this action on November 8, 2010. He filed an amended complaint on July 19, 2011, against defendants the City of Utica (“the City”); Officer Holt of the Utica Police Department (“Officer Holt”); Oneida County (“the County”); Daniel Middau

MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER DAVID N. HURD, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Dawn Kaminski (“plaintiff’ or “Kaminski”)1 and Marcus Kaminski (collectively “plaintiffs”)2 commenced this action against the Commissioner of Oneida County Department of Social Services (“Commissioner”), the Oneida County Depa

802 A.2d 1070 (2002) 145 Md. App. 256 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, v. UTICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al. No. 866, Sept. Term, 2000. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. July 2, 2002. *1074 Bruce Goldstein and Carl E. Tuerk, Jr. (Cooper & Tuerk, LLP, on the brief), Baltimore; Brian T. Fitzp

Dillon, P. J. (dissenting). I dissent. The parties are adjoining lot owners in the City of Utica. The uncontradicted evidence demonstrates beyond doubt that all of the reconstructed piers or footings supporting the posts to which defendants’ fence is connected encroach upon plaintiffs property. The tops of all footings are beneath the surface of the earth and each footing extends *104

591 F.Supp.2d 349 (2008) Barbara FINCH, Individually and on behalf of Manny Moe, Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK; Administration for Children's Services; New Alternatives for Children, Inc.: Talbot Perkins Agency; Donnett Huggins, individually, under color of state law, and in her official capacity as an employee Case Planning Specialist, Administration for Children's Services; Nancy Ruiz, individually, under color of state law, and in her of

70 F.Supp.2d 137 (1999) Joseph M. MENDOZA and Lionel Goodman, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF ROME; Police Department of the City of Rome, New York; Merino Ciccone, Individually and as Chief of Police of the City of Rome; Joseph Griffo, Individually and as Mayor and Public Safety Commissioner of the City of Rome; Ray Arcuri; Dominic Coriglino; Fred Rebinski; Investigator John Keyes; and Other Unknown Police Officers of the City of Rome, Individually and a

Hutchinson v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. (2019 NY Slip Op 03774) Hutchinson v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. 2019 NY Slip Op 03774 Decided on May 15, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Publi

Hutchinson v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. (2019 NY Slip Op 03775) Hutchinson v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. 2019 NY Slip Op 03775 Decided on May 15, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Publi

MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER DAVID N. HURD, District Judge. INTRODUCTION...............................................................380 FACTUAL BACKGROUND......................................................380 Friday, June 23-Monday, June 26, 2006 ........................................380 Tuesday, June 27, 2006 ................

783 F.Supp. 109 (1991) Ana VIALEZ, Plaintiff, v. The NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Emanuel Popolizio, individually and in his capacity as Chairman of the New York City Housing Authority, Defendants. No. 89 Civ. 8356 (DNE) (SEG). United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 18, 1991. *110 Bronx Legal Services (Jill Siegel,

OPINION OF THE COURT John R Tenney, J. The above actions present common issues of law involving the authority and status of the Board of Water Supply of the City of Utica. Action number 1 will be referred to as Fraccola and action number 2 as Nelson. In Fraccola, plaintiff originally alleged a variety of causes of action. He contended, inter alia, that t

SHACKELFORD MILLER, Jr., Cir cuit Judge. The appellant, as Administratrix of the Estate of Pasquale Vitucci, deceased, brought this action in the District Court under the Michigan Death Act, Comp. Laws 1948, § 691.581 et seq. to recover damages by reason of the death of the decedent. The decedent was killed on September 19, 1955, when

Michael P. Shea, U.S.D.J. I earlier granted summary judgment in favor of Town of Coventry police officers who entered the home of Joseph Kaminsky Jr. and seized firearms on December 16, 2011, because I found that Kaminsky had consented to the entry and seizure. Kaminsky v. Schriro , 243 F.Supp.3d 221 (D. Con

RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Michael P. Shea, United States District Judge. Acting on information that Joseph Ka-minsky, Jr., was a felon in possession of three machine guns and other firearms, state and local police officers traveled to his home in Coventry, Connecticut, on December 16, 2011. After hearing a pounding on the side of his house and observing officers in the yard with their hands on

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER GARY L. SHARPE, Chief Judge. I. Introduction Plaintiff Tony Pacherille commenced this action against defendant Brian Burns,1 individually and as an Otsego County Court Judge, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his First and Fourth Amendment rights. (Am. Compl., Dkt. No. 22.) Pending is Judge

*290MEMORANDUM, DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Justin Orden (“Orden”) filed this civil rights action in New York State court on June 2, 2016 against defendants Cornell University (“Cornell”), Brandon Frisbie (“Frisbie”, and collectively with Cornell, the “Cornell defendants”) and John and Jane Doe defendants. In his complaint, Orden asserts the fo

OPINION AND ORDER FEUERSTEIN, District Judge: Defendants Syosset Public Library, Judith Lockman and Robert Glick (“Library defendants”) and defendant law firm Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley (“Morris Duffy”) have filed motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 56. For the following reasons, both defendants’ motions are GRANTED and plaintiffs complaint is dismissed.<

Kavanagh, J. (dissenting). It is well settled that a general release “is a jural act of high significance ... It should never be converted into a starting point for renewed litigation except under circumstances and under rules which would render any other result a grave injustice” (Mangini v McClurg, 24 NY2d 556, 563 [1969]; see Booth v 3669 Delaware, 92 NY2d 934, 935 [1998]). Thus, when “the language of the rel

786 F.Supp.2d 516 (2011) John PARENT, individually and as natural parent of Child "A" and Child "B," and on behalf of parents similarly situated, also known as Leon R. Koziol, Plaintiffs, v. State of NEW YORK; Jonathan Lippman, individually and as Chief Administrative Officer of the New York Unified Court System; Unified Court System of the State of New York; John W. Grow, individually and as State Court Judge; Charles C. Merrell, individually an

Dupont, C. J. This matter is currently before us on remand from our Supreme Court. Gajewski v. Pavelo, 229 Conn. 829, 643 A.2d 1276 (1994). When we first heard this case, we applied the general verdict rule and affirmed a judgment for the defendants that followed the denial of the plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the jury verdict. Gajewski v. Pavelo, 32 Conn. App. 373, 629 A.2d 465 (1993), rev’d