green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.5 score
G Cite
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United House of Prayer for All People of the Church on the Rock of the Apostolic Faith v. L.M.A. International, Ltd.
further, the ex parte communications between the parties and the arbitrators violated aaa rules forbidding such direct contacts and warranted vacatur of the award
discussed
Cited "see"
Grendi v. LNL Construction Management Corp.
Co., 74 AD2d 938 , 939: "Where a party to an arbitration proceeding becomes aware of the misconduct, or probable partiality of an arbitrator, there would appear to be no reason why the court should not exercise its equitable jurisdiction on the application of the party at any time during the proceeding, rather than require the party to wait for the award, and then move to vacate pursuant to CPLR 7511.”; accord, Rabinowitz v Olewski, 100 AD2d 539 .) In Matter of Catalyst Waste-to-Energy Corp. (City of Long Beach) ( 164 AD2d 817 , lv dismissed 76 NY2d 1017 ) we held that a request for addition…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Johnson v. St. Barnabas Hospital
The opinion of plaintiffs’ expert that a departure existed because there was an injury is not sufficient because evidence of injury alone does not mean that there was negligence on the part of respondents (see Landau v Rappaport, 306 AD2d 446, 447 [2003]; compare Sutherland v County of Nassau, 151 AD2d 468 , 469 [1989], lv dismissed 76 NY2d 1017 [1990]).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Coty Inc. v. Anchor Construction, Inc.
Corp., 175 AD2d 775 [1991]; see also Matter of Catalyst Waste-to-Energy Corp. of Long Beach [City of Long Beach], 164 AD2d 817 [1990], appeal dismissed 76 NY2d 1017 [1990]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Scott Sutherland, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Jayceline Sutherland
v.
County of Nassau
v.
County of Nassau
Cited by 10 opinions | Published
Citer courts: S.D. New York (1)
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that simultaneous appeals do not lie to both the Appellate Division and the Court of Appeals.