green
Positive treatment
Trending · 115 recent citers
4.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2009
2017
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
MAZELLA, JANICE v. BEALS, M.D., WILLIAM
“Where, as here, conflicting expert testimony is presented, the jury is entitled to accept one expert’s opinion and reject that of another expert” (Taylor v Hoque, 94 AD3d 978, 979 [2012]; see Sisson v Alexander, 57 AD3d 1483, 1483-1484 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 709 [2009]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Smith v. Nestle Purina Petcare Co.
Pursuant to that regulation, “[i]ce, snow, water, grease and any other foreign substance which may cause slippery footing shall be removed, sanded or covered to provide safe footing.” That regulation is not applicable to the facts of this case because “the [grain dust] on which plaintiff slipped was the very condition he was charged with removing” and thus was an integral part of the task plaintiff was performing (Gaisor v Gregory Madison Ave., LLC, 13 AD3d 58, 60 [2004]; see Galazka v WFP One Liberty Plaza Co., LLC, 55 AD3d 789, 789 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 709 [2009]; Basile v ICF K…
discussed
Cited "see"
Smith v. Nestle Purina Petcare Co.
Pursuant to that regulation, “[i]ce, snow, water, grease and any other foreign substance which may cause slippery footing shall be removed, sanded or covered to provide safe footing.” That regulation is not applicable to the facts of this case because “the [grain dust] on which plaintiff slipped was the very condition he was charged with removing” and thus was an integral part of the task plaintiff was performing (Gaisor v Gregory Madison Ave., LLC, 13 AD3d 58, 60 [2004]; see Galazka v WFP One Liberty Plaza Co., LLC, 55 AD3d 789, 789 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 709 [2009]; Basile v ICF K…
discussed
Cited "see"
SMITH, PAUL J. v. NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY
Pursuant to that regulation, “[i]ce, snow, water, grease and any other foreign substance which may cause slippery footing shall be removed, sanded or covered to provide safe footing.” That regulation is not applicable to the facts of this case because “the [grain dust] on which plaintiff slipped was the very condition he was charged with removing” and thus was an integral part of the task plaintiff was performing (Gaisor v Gregory Madison Ave., LLC, 13 AD3d 58, 60 ; see Galazka v WFP One Liberty Plaza Co., LLC, 55 AD3d 789, 789 , lv denied 12 NY3d 709 ; Basile v ICF Kaiser Engrs.
discussed
Cited "see"
R., JUSTAIN, MTR. OF
Thus, petitioner established that the father “failed to address successfully the problems that led to the removal of the child[ren] and continued to prevent the child[ren]’s safe return” (Ja-Nathan F., 309 AD2d 1152 ; see Matter of Brittany K., 59 AD3d 952 , 953, lv denied 12 NY3d 709 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Justain R.
Thus, petitioner established that the father “failed to address successfully the problems that led to the removal of the child[ren] and continued to prevent the child[ren]’s safe return” (Ja-Nathan F., 309 AD2d 1152 ; see Matter of Brittany K., 59 AD3d 952 , 953 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 709 [2009]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MURRAY
v.
HIRSCH.
v.
HIRSCH.
Published
Motion for leave to appeal denied.