cited rule in New York

2024Inasmuch as the alleged dangerous and defective sidewalk condition did not result from any act or omission of defendant, it cannot be held liable for plaintiffs injuries under the cited exception (see Garcia v City ofNew York, 99 AD3d 491 ,492 [1st Dept 2012]).

2019Although the 1968 Building Code requirement for handrails is referenced, it is well established that the cited requirement only applies to internal stairs that serve as a required exit, but not to the access stairs which were involved in this accident ( Cusumano, supra ; [*2]Pwangsunthie v Marco Realty , 136 AD3d 502 [1st Dept 2016]).

2019Although the 1968 Building Code requirement for handrails is referenced, it is well established that the cited requirement only applies to internal stairs that serve as a required exit, but not to the access stairs which were involved in this accident ( Cusumano, supra ; [*2]Pwangsunthie v Marco Realty , 136 AD3d 502 [1st Dept 2016]).

2017For example, while the court emphasized the husband’s obligation to pay the mortgage on his home and the parties’ apparent ability to maintain appropriate residences, the costs associated with providing shelter, food and clothing to children while exercising parenting time are not factors that justify a deviation (see Matter of Mitchell v Mitch *1570 ell, 134 AD3d at 1215-1216 ; Riemersma v Riemersma, 84 AD3d at 1477 ).

2017And the defendant must demonstrate particular factors that would allow a court to make “ ‘specific findings’ ” that the above cited test is satisfied; the mere “ ‘possibility’ ” that publicity “might affect jury selection” is not sufficient (id.). “[B]are con-clusory assertions” of potential jury taint are insufficient (People v Burton, 189 AD2d at 536 ; see also People v DeBeer, 3 Misc 3d 515, 517 [Ontario County Ct 2004] [“mere conclusory, nonspecific allegations” are insufficient to warrant sealing]).

2017For example, while the court emphasized the husband’s obligation to pay the mortgage on his home and the parties’ apparent ability to maintain appropriate residences, the costs associated with providing shelter, food and clothing to children while exercising parenting time are not factors that justify a deviation (see Matter of Mitchell v Mitch *1570 ell, 134 AD3d at 1215-1216 ; Riemersma v Riemersma, 84 AD3d at 1477 ).

2010Although the trial court cited the rule that “the purchase price set in the course of an arm’s length transaction of recent vintage, if not explained away as abnormal in any fashion, is evidence of the ‘highest rank’ to determine the true value of the property at that time” (Plaza Hotel Assoc. v Wellington Assoc., 37 NY2d 273, 277 [1975]), and thus considered the price set forth in the 1998 purchase agreement for the property, the court properly recognized that such evidence is not determinative and took into account other factors (see Matter of Kings Mayflower v Finance Adm’r of City of N.Y.,

2010Corp., 221 AD2d 243 [1995]; Greenwald v Trimfoot Co., 221 AD2d 245 [1995]), and does not create an independent right of recovery in favor of a third party such as plaintiff herein.

2010Corp., 221 AD2d 243 [1995]; Greenwald v Trimfoot Co., 221 AD2d 245 [1995]), and does not create an independent right of recovery in favor of a third party such as plaintiff herein.

2010In the pending matter, [the surety] vacated the default judgment against itself and a subsequent hearing was held which determined [its] liability on the bond” (102 Ill App 3d at 447, 430 NE2d at 93 ).

2003As the letter itself and petitioner’s admission at the hearing that he authored it constitute substantial evidence of a violation of the cited rule (see Matter of Surdis v Walsh, 295 AD2d 735, 736 [2002]; Matter of Jones v Department of Correctional Servs. of State of N.Y., 283 AD2d 805 [2001]), we find no basis to disturb the determination.

2001Indeed, it has been held, and we agree, that a lawyer can act in violation of the rule even where litigation had not yet commenced (see, United States v Hammad, 858 F2d 834, cert denied 498 US 871 ; Meachum v Outdoor World Corp., 171 Misc 2d 354 ).

2001Indeed, it has been held, and we agree, that a lawyer can act in violation of the rule even where litigation had not yet commenced (see, United States v Hammad, 858 F2d 834, cert denied 498 US 871 ; Meachum v Outdoor World Corp., 171 Misc 2d 354 ).

1998We note that another portion of this same rule in the Management Manual (requiring a preliminary showing of merit as a condition precedent to a hearing) was upheld as valid in Matter of Henderson v Popolizio ( 76 NY2d 972 ), notwithstanding a similar due process and statutory challenge.

1997In any event, even assuming that the People are correct that defendant did not interpose a timely and/or properly enunciated objection to the complained of testimony, this clearly is the kind of case where we are called upon to entertain the cited error in the interest of justice (see, People v McGill, 47 AD2d 961, 962 ; CPL 470.15 [6] [a]).

1997If the bank sought to limit its liability for negligence, it was incumbent upon it to express the limitation and to do so unequivocally (Lago v Krollage, 78 NY2d 95, 99-100 ).

1994In Hernandez, the People did not dispute, neither at the trial court, nor in the New York Court of Appeals, nor in the United States Supreme Court, that the defendant had established a prima facie case of discrimination against persons of Hispanic descent (see, Hernandez v New York, supra, at 378 [dissenting opn of Stevens, J.]; People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350, 356 , supra).

1993Because the challenged determination is not supported by substantial evidence, respondent is directed to expunge all references to this proceeding (see, Matter of Grimmett v Riley, 192 AD2d 831 ).

1989The court there cited the doctrine " 'that a member of one of the learned professions, upon becoming assistant to another member thereof, may, upon a sufficient consideration, bind himself not to engage in the practice of his profession upon the termination of his contract of employment, within a reasonable territorial extent’ ” ( 28 NY2d 45, 49 , supra, quoting Annotation, Restriction on Practice of Physician, 58 ALR 156 , 162).

1987Concededly, strict application of the statutory filing requirement leads to an apparently harsh result in this case, but we are persuaded that "[t]he only safe and sure way to proceed with and maintain the retirement system is to follow the law which brought it into being and which has prescribed its limitations.” (Matter of Creveling v Teachers’ Retirement Bd., 255 NY 364, 373 ; accord, Matter of Guzman v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., supra.) Finally, we would note that petitioner has adduced no basis for invoking any estoppel against respondent’s rejection of her application, eve