green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 6×
14.7 score
G Cite
cited 4× by 4 distinct cases, 2020–2025 · 3 courts ·
…the veracity of citizen complaints who are the victims of the very crime they report to the police is assumed.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 17 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Odaine Scott and Lisa Samuels v. The City of New York; New York Police Department Officer Michael Catanzaro, individually and in his official capacity; New York Police Department Officers John Does, individually and in their official capacities
the veracity of citizen complaints who are the victims of the very crime they report to the police is assumed.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Douglas v. City of Peekskill
the veracity of citizen complaints who are the victims of the very crime they report to the police is assumed.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Peterkin v. Carr
the veracity of citizen complaints who are the victims of the very crime they report to the police is assumed.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Wilson v. Faulkner
t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to arrest if he received his information from some person, normally the putative victim or eyewitness.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
PINKNEY v. MEADVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA
t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to attest if he received his information from some person, normally the putative victim or eyewitness, who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Albino v. The City of Amsterdam Police
the veracity of citizen complaints who are the victims of the very crime they report to the police is assumed.
discussed
Cited "see"
McMillan v. Capital One Bank, N.A.
Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 , 270 (2000); see Miloslavsky v. AES Eng’g Soc., Inc., 808 F. Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (“The veracity of citizen complainants who are the victims of the very -7- crime they report to the police is assumed.”), aff’d 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir. 1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Granito v. Tiska
See Martinez v. Simonetti, 202 F.3d 625, 634 (2d Cir.2000) (“ ‘[I]t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to arrest if he received his information from some person, normally the putative victim or eyewitness.’ ”) (quoting Miloslavsky v. AES Eng’g Soc’y, 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y.1992), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Caldarola v. Calabrese
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
In the case of “an identified bystander with no apparent motive to falsify,” however, the information they provide has “a peculiar likelihood of accuracy.” Rollins, 522 F.2d at 164 ; see Miloslavsky v. AES Engineering Society, 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y.1992) (“[I]t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to arrest if he received his information from some person,* normally the putative victim or eyewitness, who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth.”), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993); see also People v. Hicks, 38 N.Y.2d 90, 94 , 37…
discussed
Cited "see"
Caldarola v. Calabrese
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
In the case of "an identified bystander with no apparent motive to falsify," however, the information they provide has "a peculiar likelihood of accuracy." Rollins, 522 F.2d at 164 ; see Miloslavsky v. AES Engineering Society, 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y.1992) ("[I]t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to arrest if he received his information from some person, normally the putative victim or eyewitness, who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth."), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993); see also People v. Hicks, 38 N.Y.2d 90, 94 , 378 N.Y.S.2d 66…
cited
Cited "see"
Luis Triana v. United States
See United States v. Lopez, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993) (unpublished table decision).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mistretta v. Prokesch
See Miloslavsky v. AES Engineering Society, 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y.1992) (“The veracity of citizen complaints who are the victims of the very crime they report to the police is assumed.”), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 510 U.S. 817 , 114 S.Ct. 68 , 126 L.Ed.2d 37 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Spence v. Superintendent
See Miloslavsky v. AES Engineering Soc., Inc., 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y.1992) (victim complaints suffice to establish probable cause), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 817 , 114 S.Ct. 68 , 126 L.Ed.2d 37 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Augustine v. Reid
See Miloslavsky v. AES Engineering Society, Inc., 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 114 S.Ct. 68 , 126 L.Ed.2d 37 (1993) (“[I]t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to arrest if he received his information from some person, normally the putative victim or eyewitness, who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth.”).
cited
Cited "see"
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Empresa Naviera Santa
See Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. M/V Lunamar II, 797 FSupp 1244 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), aff'd 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harrison v. Kennedy
See Bobolakis v. DiPietrantonio, 523 F. App’x 85, 87 (2d Cir. 2013) (summary order) (affirming a finding of probable cause for a DUI arrest where, inter alia, “[t]wo separate drivers called 911 to report that Bobolakis was driving erratically on the highway, describing him as swerving in and out of his lane” and the “second 911 caller followed Bobolakis as he exited the highway to assist the dispatcher in sending police vehicles to respond”); see also Caldarola v. Calabrese, 298 F.3d 156, 163 (2d Cir. 2002) (“‘[I]t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Celestin v. City of New York
See also Miloslavsky v. AES Engineering Soc., Inc., 808 F.Supp. 351, 355 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), aff'd, 993 F.2d 1534 (2d Cir.1993) (“[I]t is well-established that a law enforcement official has probable cause to arrest if he received his information from some person, normally the putative victim or eyewitness, who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Central Hudson Gas
v.
Lunamar II
v.
Lunamar II
92-9260.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Apr 27, 1993.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Central Hudson Gas
v.
Lunamar II
NO. 92-9260
United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.
Apr 27, 1993
Appeal From: S.D.N.Y., 797 F.Supp. 1244
1
AFFIRMED.