Sacco v. Bratton, 223 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
Sacco v. Bratton, 223 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Advent Software, Inc. v. SEI Global Servs., Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · confidence medium
The injunction maintained the status quo, and the harm to SEI absent an injunction outweighed the prejudice to Advent from an injunction ( see Barbes, 140 AD3d at 432 ; Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1st Dept 1996]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Advent Software, Inc. v. SEI Global Servs., Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · confidence medium
The injunction maintained the status quo, and the harm to SEI absent an injunction outweighed the prejudice to Advent from an injunction ( see Barbes, 140 AD3d at 432 ; Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1st Dept 1996]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kruk v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1st Dept 1996]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kruk v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1st Dept 1996]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Masjid Usman, Inc. v. Beech 140, LLC
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
In this regard, the plaintiff was entitled to a reduced degree of proof with respect to this issue, since the denial of a preliminary injunction in this case would disturb the status quo and likely render the final judgment ineffectual (see North Fork Preserve, Inc. v Kaplan, 31 AD3d 403, 406 [2006]; State of New York v City of New York, 275 AD2d 740, 741 [2000]; Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1996]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Green Harbour Homeowners' Ass'n v. Ermiger
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
The threatened removal of large trees constitutes irreparable harm (see Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1996]; Sforza v Nesconset Fire Dist., 184 AD2d 631, 632 [1992]; Wiederspiel v Bernholz, 163 AD2d 774, 775 [1990]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gerald Modell Inc. v. Morgenthau
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 2003 · confidence medium
Thus, absent injunctive relief, if the jewelry items are returned to the owners, any final judgment would be rendered ineffectual (see Gramercy Co. v Benenson, 223 AD2d 497, 498 [1st Dept 1996]; Sau Thi Ma v Xuan T.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Daniel Sacco
v.
William Bratton, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jan 30, 1996.
223 A.D.2d 497
Published

Determination of respondent Commissioner, dated July 5,1994, finding that petitioner made an unauthorized radio transmission, and ordering that the petitioner forfeit five vacation days, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by an order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Harold Tompkins, J.], entered April 10, 1995) dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence supports the finding that petitioner made an unauthorized radio transmission, since his immediate supervisor, who heard the transmission broadcast over the radio, identified the voice as petitioner’s based upon her supervision of him during three tours of duty each week for approximately five months before the incident, which supervision entailed speaking with petitioner personally in the course of their respective duties (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 230-231). The Hearing Officer properly weighed conflicting, expert testimony (supra). We have considered petitioner’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.