Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Matter of State of New York v. Jamaal A.
Although respondent's SIST violations did not involve sexual conduct, they demonstrated an "increased sexual preoccupation, [as well as] ongoing deceptive, manipulative, and victim-grooming behaviors." Moreover, respondent had resisted supervision and seemed unable to refrain from his "impulsive, high-risk behaviors in total disregard of the known potential negative consequences of such behaviors." We thus conclude that the SIST violations "[bore] a close causative relationship to sex offending" ( George N. , 160 AD3d at 33), and " remain highly relevant regarding the level of danger that [res…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Matter of State of New York v. William J.
In Matter of State of New York v Husted ( 145 AD3d 1637 [2016]), this Court followed the rule set forth in Michael M. and determined that the evidence established that the respondent violated the terms and conditions of his SIST regimen by using alcohol and marihuana, and by being discharged from sex offender treatment (see id. at 1638).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Matter of State of New York v. David HH.
Deferring to Supreme Court’s ability to evaluate Field’s unrebutted opinion testimony (see Matter of Rene I. v *1235 State of New York, 146 AD3d 1056, 1058 [2017]; Matter of William II. v State of New York, 110 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2013]), we find that petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that respondent is a dangerous sex offender requiring civil confinement (see Matter of State of New York v Breeden, 140 AD3d at 1649-1650 ; Matter of State of New York v Donald N., 63 AD3d 1391, 1392-1395 [2009]; compare Matter of State of New York v Michael M., 24 NY3d at 659 ; Matter of S…
discussed
Cited "see"
Matter of State of New York v. Anthony R.
"A mere tendency to engage in risky or socially undesirable conduct — even if that conduct provides an opportunity for, or increases the likelihood of, sexual offending — is quintessentially insufficient to establish 'inability' under the Michael M. formulation" ( George N., 160 AD3d at 31; see Matter of State of New York v Husted, 145 AD3d 1637, 1638 [4th Dept 2016]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
William Andre Et Al., Respondents,
v.
Fred L. Sanfilipo, D.C., Et Al., Appellants
v.
Fred L. Sanfilipo, D.C., Et Al., Appellants
CA 16-00286.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 23, 2016.
Lindley, NeMoyer, Peradotto, Present--Centra, Scudder.
Published
Appeal from an amended order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Richard A. Dollinger, A.J.), entered November 30, 2015. The amended order, inter alia, denied the motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on October 31 and November 2, 2016,
It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.
Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Lindley, NeMoyer and Scudder, JJ.