128 New York opinions name it 14 courts 1848–2026 10 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hoffer-Adou v. Adougreen2 sentences2026No judgment of divorce shall be granted under this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal support, the payment of child support, the payment of counsel and experts' fees and expenses as well as the custody and visitation with the infant children of the marriage have been resolved by the parties, or determined by the court and incorporated into the judgment of divorce." A spouse's statement under oath that the marriage was irretrievably broken for a period of six months is, by itself, sufficient to establi 2025No judgment of divorce shall be granted under this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal support, the payment of child support, the payment of counsel and experts' fees and expenses as well as the custody and visitation with the infant children of the marriage have been resolved by the parties, or determined by the court and incorporated into the judgment of divorce." A spouse's statement under oath that the marriage was irretrievably broken for a period of six months is, by itself, sufficient to establi | 4 | 5 |
Fiorentino v. Atlas Park LLCgreen2 sentences2013As Sage concedes, there is no issue of fact as to the owner’s active culpability in the underlying accident, and therefore the owner is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for contractual indemnification (see Florentino v Atlas Park LLC, 95 AD3d 424, 426-427 [1st Dept 2012]; Macedo v J.D. 2013As Sage concedes, there is no issue of fact as to the owner’s active culpability in the underlying accident, and therefore the owner is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for contractual indemnification (see Florentino v Atlas Park LLC, 95 AD3d 424, 426-427 [1st Dept 2012]; Macedo v J.D. | 2 | 2 |
Hospital for Joint Diseases v. Travelers Property Casualty Insurancegreen2 sentences2013Co., 34 AD3d 532, 532 [2006]), the fact that an insurer may eventually be precluded from asserting a defense against the payment of a claim does not affect the plaintiffs burden of affirmatively establishing, prima facie, the merits of its case in the first instance (see Ops Gen Counsel NY Ins Dept No. 00-01-02 [Jan. 11, 2000]; compare Fair Price Med. 2013Co., 34 AD3d 532, 532 [2006]), the fact that an insurer may eventually be precluded from asserting a defense against the payment of a claim does not affect the plaintiffs burden of affirmatively establishing, prima facie, the merits of its case in the first instance (see Ops Gen Counsel NY Ins Dept No. 00-01-02 [Jan. 11, 2000]; compare Fair Price Med. | 2 | 2 |
Osterhoudt v. . Rigneygreen2 sentences1892(Osterhoudt v. Rigney et al., 98 N. Y., 222, 230, 231 .) At the time of his employment the defendant Anderson Avas a member of the board of supeiwisors ; they were the agents of the county of Sullivan, and as such had no right to enter into contracts for their own benefit with their principal, the county of Sullivan. 1892Osterhoudt v. Rigney, 98 N. Y. 222, 230, 231 . | 2 | 2 |
Dan's Hauling & Demo, Inc. v. GMMM Hickling, LLCgreen1 sentence2023In a prior appeal, we concluded, inter alia, that the payment clause was ambiguous and that the court erred in granting defendants summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's breach of contract cause of action and with respect to liability on defendants' first counterclaim ( Dan's Hauling & Demo, Inc. v GMMM Hickling, LLC , 193 AD3d 1404, 1408 [4th Dept 2021]). | 1 | 1 |
Lew Morris Demolition Co. v. Board of Educationgreen2 sentences2022The partial payment exception "requires proof that 'there was a payment of a portion of an admitted debt, made and accepted as such, accompanied by circumstances amounting to an absolute and unqualified acknowledgment by the debtor of more being due, from which a promise may be inferred to pay the remainder' " ( id. at 1297, quoting Lew Morris Demolition Co. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y. , 40 NY2d 516, 521 [1976]). 2022"If the exception is established, the statute of limitations begins to run anew from the date of the partial payment" ( id. ). | 1 | 1 |
Hosford v. Hosfordgreen1 sentence2022Defendants took title to the property in question as husband and wife without any restriction, and they thereupon became tenants by the entirety ( see Hosford v Hosford , 273 App Div 659, 661 [4th Dept 1948]). | 1 | 1 |
ROMILLY, DAVID T. v. RMF PRODUCTIONS, LLCgreen2 sentences2021Nevertheless, even considering the extrinsic evidence submitted by plaintiff, plaintiff failed to meet its initial burden "of establishing that the construction it favors is the only construction which can fairly be placed thereon" ( Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. , 148 AD3d at 1529 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Romilly v RMF Prods., LLC , 106 AD3d 1465 , 1466 [4th Dept 2013]; Morales v Asarese Matters Community Ctr. [appeal No. 2], 103 AD3d 1262 , 1264 [4th Dept 2013], lv dismissed 21 NY3d 1033 [2013]). 2021As discussed above, the payment clause is ambiguous, and the record does not establish that the construction favored by defendants is the only construction that can be fairly placed on that clause ( see generally Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. , 148 AD3d at 1529 ; Romilly , 106 AD3d at 1466; Morales , 103 AD3d at 1264). | 1 | 1 |
Morales v. Asarese Matters Community Centergreen2 sentences2021Nevertheless, even considering the extrinsic evidence submitted by plaintiff, plaintiff failed to meet its initial burden "of establishing that the construction it favors is the only construction which can fairly be placed thereon" ( Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. , 148 AD3d at 1529 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Romilly v RMF Prods., LLC , 106 AD3d 1465 , 1466 [4th Dept 2013]; Morales v Asarese Matters Community Ctr. [appeal No. 2], 103 AD3d 1262 , 1264 [4th Dept 2013], lv dismissed 21 NY3d 1033 [2013]). 2021As discussed above, the payment clause is ambiguous, and the record does not establish that the construction favored by defendants is the only construction that can be fairly placed on that clause ( see generally Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. , 148 AD3d at 1529 ; Romilly , 106 AD3d at 1466; Morales , 103 AD3d at 1264). | 1 | 1 |
Ross v. Ross Metals Corp.green1 sentence2021Ogden, Inc. v Jordache Dev. , 298 AD2d 976, 976 [4th Dept 2002]; see generally CPLR 3018 [b]; Ross v Ross Metals Corp. , 111 AD3d 695, 696-697 [2d Dept 2013]; State of New York Higher Educ. | 1 | 1 |
P.B. Ogden, Inc. v. Jordache Development, Inc.green1 sentence2021Ogden, Inc. v Jordache Dev. , 298 AD2d 976, 976 [4th Dept 2002]; see generally CPLR 3018 [b]; Ross v Ross Metals Corp. , 111 AD3d 695, 696-697 [2d Dept 2013]; State of New York Higher Educ. | 1 | 1 |
Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. v. Schmidt & Schmidt, Inc.green2 sentences2021We conclude that plaintiff failed to establish that the construction it favors is the only one that can be fairly placed upon the payment clause ( see generally id. ). 2021As discussed above, the payment clause is ambiguous, and the record does not establish that the construction favored by defendants is the only construction that can be fairly placed on that clause ( see generally Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. , 148 AD3d at 1529 ; Romilly , 106 AD3d at 1466; Morales , 103 AD3d at 1264). | 1 | 1 |
Paul M. Ellington v. EMI Music, Inc.green2 sentences2021Thus, we conclude that the payment clause is ambiguous inasmuch as it does not possess "a definite and precise meaning" and there is a "reasonable basis for a difference of opinion" ( Ellington , 24 NY3d at 244 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Ames , 162 AD3d at 1726-1727). 2021Thus, we conclude that the payment clause is ambiguous inasmuch as it does not possess "a definite and precise meaning" and there is a "reasonable basis for a difference of opinion" ( Ellington , 24 NY3d at 244 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Ames , 162 AD3d at 1726-1727). | 1 | 1 |
Burger v. Burgergreen1 sentence2014Their subsequent commencement in the Family Court of proceedings concerning these issues did not render the court without authority to grant the divorce, since “[n]oncompliance with, or enforcement of, the separation agreement is not an element of Domestic Relations Law § 170 (7)” (Burger v Burger, 36 Misc 3d 752, 755 [Sup Ct, Nassau County 2012]). | 1 | 1 |
Coffman v. Coffmangreen1 sentence2011It never has been understood to restrict the general right of the legislature to legislate on the subject of divorces.’ ” (Gleason v Gleason at 42 [citations omitted]; see also Coffman v Coffman, 60 AD2d 181 [2d Dept 1977].) While this court would ordinarily grant partial summary judgment to movant, where there are no defenses and no triable issues of fact, the new legislation directs that “[n]o judgment of divorce shall be granted under this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal support, the payment of | 1 | 1 |
Gleason v. Gleasongreen1 sentence2011It never has been understood to restrict the general right of the legislature to legislate on the subject of divorces.’ ” (Gleason v Gleason at 42 [citations omitted]; see also Coffman v Coffman, 60 AD2d 181 [2d Dept 1977].) While this court would ordinarily grant partial summary judgment to movant, where there are no defenses and no triable issues of fact, the new legislation directs that “[n]o judgment of divorce shall be granted under this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal support, the payment of | 1 | 1 |
Claim of McGuinness v. John P. Picone, Inc.green1 sentence2009Maintenance, 63 AD3d 1308 [2009]; Matter of McGuinness v John P. Picone, Inc., 36 AD3d 1032, 1032 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
| James McCullagh Co. v. South Huntington Union Free School Districtgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Landmark West! v. New York City Board of Standardsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| De Mayo v. Rensselaer Polytech Institutegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Corning v. Village of Laurel Hollowgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Corning v. Village of Laurel Hollowgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Claim of Felder v. City of New York Traffic Law Departmentgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Kulko v. Superior Court of Cal., City and County of San Franciscogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bayswater Realty & Capital Corp. v. Planning Board of Lewisborogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
PALERMO, CHRISTINE L. v. PALERMO, JOSEPH A.
neutral
2 sentences2014We agree with plaintiff that the opposing spouse in a no-fault divorce action pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 170 (7) is not entitled to litigate the other spouse’s sworn statement that the relationship has broken down irretrievably for a period of at least six months (see Palermo v Palermo, 35 Misc. 3d 1211[A] , 2011 NY Slip Op 52506[U] , *15 [2011], affd for reasons stated 100 AD3d 1453 [2012]; see e.g. 2014We agree with plaintiff that the opposing spouse in a no-fault divorce action pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 170 (7) is not entitled to litigate the other spouse’s sworn statement that the relationship has broken down irretrievably for a period of at least six months (see Palermo v Palermo, 35 Misc. 3d 1211[A] , 2011 NY Slip Op 52506[U] , *15 [2011], affd for reasons stated 100 AD3d 1453 [2012]; see e.g. | 3 | 2014–2014 |
Claim of Cammarata v. Caldwell & Cook, Inc.
green
2 sentences2021Under those circumstances, where there is clearly no obligation to maintain workers' compensation insurance after an entity ceases doing business and is dissolved, this Court affirmed the finding that the policy in effect at the time that the husband was last employed was the carrier responsible for the payment of the claim ( Matter of Cammarata v Caldwell & Cook Inc. , 19 AD3d at 884-885 ). 2009Relying upon its interpretation of this Court’s holding in Matter of Cammarata v Caldwell & Cook Inc. ( 19 AD3d 884 [2005]), the Board concluded that SIF, the carrier that had a policy in place with Trio when claimant was last exposed to asbestos, was liable for the payment of this claim. | 2 | 2009–2021 |
American Defense Society, Inc. v. Sherman National Bank
green
2 sentences1983Bank of N. Y., 225 NY 506). 1981Bank of N. Y., 225 NY 506 ). | 2 | 1981–1983 |
Singer v. Yokohama Specie Bank, Ltd.
neutral
2 sentences1951Supp., tit. 3, p. 645) its provisions “ did not prevent the accrual or creation of the claim sued upon or render such claim void, but merely prevented the payment of the claim until an appropriate federal license is obtained ” (see Singer v. Yokohama Specie Bank, 293 N. Y. 542 , motion for reargument denied 294 N. Y. 689 ; 299 N. Y. 113 , motion for reargument denied 300 N. Y. 459 , affd. sub nom. 1949A Federal question was presented and necessarily passed upon by this court, viz.: it was held that the provisions of Executive Order No. 8389, as amended, and the rules and regulations issued pursuant thereto did not prevent the accrual or creation of the claim sued upon or render such claim void, but merely prevented the payment of the claim until an appropriate Federal license is obtained, and that the documents in evidence do not constitute such a license. [See 299 N. Y. 113 .] | 2 | 1949–1951 |
In re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of the Executors of Littleton
green
2 sentences1939(Matter of Littleton, 129 Misc. 845 .) “ But even if a deficiency judgment on the bond should be recovered, I hold, in justice and in equity, that the administrator, in the absence of bad faith or fraud, may not be held personally liable for the amount thereof. 1933(Matter of Littleton, 129 Misc. 845 .) But even if a deficiency judgment on the bond should be recovered, I hold, in justice and in equity, that the administrator, in the absence of bad faith or fraud, may not be held personally hable for the amount thereof. | 2 | 1933–1939 |
Swift v. . Mayor, Etc., of City of New York
green
2 sentences1933This fund can be expended only for the specific object specified in the resolution.” In Swift v. Mayor, etc., of City of New York ( 83 N. Y. 528 ) the court, speaking of an appropriation for removing garbage from the streets, said (p. 536): “ As before shown, the only remedy of the plaintiff was to follow this fund and the law impressed upon it a trust for the payment of his claim out of it. 1915Darmat v. Comptroller, 77 N. Y. 45 ; In the case of Swift v. Mayor, supra, the court, speaking of an appropriation for removing garbage from the streets, said (p. 536): “As before shown, the only remedy of the plaintiff was to follow this fund and the law impressed upon it a trust for the payment of his claim out of it. | 2 | 1915–1933 |
People Ex Rel. Lentilhon v. . Coler
green
2 sentences1903Lentilhon v. Coler, 168 N. Y. 6 , 60 N. E. 1046 , the court said: “The comptroller of the city of New York resisted the payment of the claim on two grounds, based on the relator’s alleged violation of the labor law, viz.: (1) In that he compelled or allowed his employés to labor more than eight hours a day; and (2) in that he had not paid his mechanics, workmen and laborers the prevailing rate of wages. 1903Lentilhon v. Coler, 168 N. Y. 6 , 60 N. E. 1046 , the court said: “The comptroller of the city of New York resisted the payment of the claim on two grounds, based on the relator’s alleged violation of the labor law, viz.: (1) In that he compelled or allowed his employés to labor more than eight hours a day; and (2) in that he had not paid his mechanics, workmen and laborers the prevailing rate of wages. | 2 | 1903–1903 |
In Re the Final Accounting of Frazer
green
2 sentences1900Thus, in Re Frazer, 92 N. Y. 239 , it was held that: “The executors having paid it [a claim], and produced their voucher, the burden was on the contestants to show that it was not a just debt of the estate. * * * As the contestants did not establish that the payment was unjust and not a debt of the estate, the payment by the executor was properly allowed. * * * The burden was on the contestants to prove their case.” And in Boughton v.,Flint, 74 N. Y. 476 , it was said: “The accounting party is not bound to establish payments for which he presents vouchers, unless they are denied by the objecti 1895(Boughton v. Flint, 74 N. Y. 477 ; Metzger v. Metzger, 1 Bradf. 265 ; Matter of Accounting of Frazer, 92 N. Y. 239 .) It was shown that the deceased lived with her daughter Flavilla, but we have no right, according to the case of Ulrich v. Ulrich ( 136 N. Y. 120 ), to presume as matter of law that there was no agreement that Flavilla should be paid for her services. | 2 | 1895–1900 |
Defreest v. . Warner
neutral
2 sentences1885If an individual owing this claim had at the same date recognized his liability and provided money for the payment of the claim in precisely the same way, the running of any prior time as a bar to the claim would have been defeated (De Freest v. Warner, 98 N. Y. 217 * ); and the same effect must be given. to the acts referred to against the State (People v. Dennison, 80 N. Y. 656 * ); and hence, when this claim was filed with the board of audit in 1882, it was hot barred by any limitation of time. 1885If an individual owing this claim had at the same date recognized his liability and provided money for the payment of the claim in precisely the same way, the running of any prior time as a bar to the claim would have been defeated (De Freest v. Warner, 98 N. Y. 217 ); and the same effect must be given to the acts referred to against the State (People v. Denison, 80 N. Y. 656 ); and hence when this claim was filed with the board of audit in 1882 it was not barred by any limitation of time. | 2 | 1885–1885 |
People v. . Denison
neutral
2 sentences1885If an individual owing this claim had at the same date recognized his liability and provided money for the payment of the claim in precisely the same way, the running of any prior time as a bar to the claim would have been defeated (De Freest v. Warner, 98 N. Y. 217 * ); and the same effect must be given. to the acts referred to against the State (People v. Dennison, 80 N. Y. 656 * ); and hence, when this claim was filed with the board of audit in 1882, it was hot barred by any limitation of time. 1885If an individual owing this claim had at the same date recognized his liability and provided money for the payment of the claim in precisely the same way, the running of any prior time as a bar to the claim would have been defeated (De Freest v. Warner, 98 N. Y. 217 ); and the same effect must be given to the acts referred to against the State (People v. Denison, 80 N. Y. 656 ); and hence when this claim was filed with the board of audit in 1882 it was not barred by any limitation of time. | 2 | 1885–1885 |
In re the Guardianship of Kevin Z.
green
1 sentence2021Nevertheless, even considering the extrinsic evidence submitted by plaintiff, plaintiff failed to meet its initial burden "of establishing that the construction it favors is the only construction which can fairly be placed thereon" ( Auburn Custom Millwork, Inc. , 148 AD3d at 1529 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Romilly v RMF Prods., LLC , 106 AD3d 1465 , 1466 [4th Dept 2013]; Morales v Asarese Matters Community Ctr. [appeal No. 2], 103 AD3d 1262 , 1264 [4th Dept 2013], lv dismissed 21 NY3d 1033 [2013]). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Awards. Com, LLC v. Kinko's, Inc.
green
1 sentence2021Contrary to plaintiff's further contention, defendants did not breach the agreement by failing to afford plaintiff an opportunity to cure prior to defendants' termination of the agreement, because the agreement does not contain a provision requiring that defendants give plaintiff an opportunity to cure a failure to make a timely installment payment ( see generally Awards.com, LLC v Kinko's, Inc. , 14 NY3d 791 , 793 [2010]; Nader & Sons, LLC v Hazak Assoc. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Beigel v. Cohen
green
1 sentence2011Contrary to plaintiffs’ assertions, it is within a court’s discretion to condition an application for a voluntary discontinuance made pursuant to CPLR 3217 (b) upon the movant paying the adverse party’s legal fees, costs, and disbursements (see Beigel v Cohen, 158 AD2d 339 [1990]). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Claim of Manticoff v. American Building Maintenance green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Claim of Nathan v. Presbyterian Hospital green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Claim of Granberry v. JCCA Edenwald, Inc. green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Abbate v. Abbate green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Hanson v. Denckla green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Klette v. Klette green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Shaffer v. Heitner green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Kreutter v. McFadden Oil Corp. green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Ivor, Inc. v. Hayes neutral | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Gombas v. Roberts green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Rawson v. Silo neutral | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Vogelhut v. Waldbaum's Supermarket neutral | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Standard Manufacturing Co. v. Tax Commission green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Matter of Standard Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Tax Comm'n of the State of New York neutral | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Zurich Insurance v. Evans green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Peo. Ex Rel. Att. Gen. v. . SEC. L. Ins. and Ann. Co. green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Simpson v. . Foundation Co. green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| Detandt v. Lombard green | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| Robbins v. Abrew neutral | 1 | 1971–1971 |
| Helterline v. People green | 1 | 1971–1971 |
| Leone v. New York Central Railroad green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| Nowka v. Nowka green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| In Re David Brown Printing Co. green | 1 | 1959–1959 |
| Woodruff v. H. B. Claflin Co. green | 1 | 1959–1959 |
| In re the Estate of McClatchey green | 1 | 1959–1959 |
| In re the Estate of Porter neutral | 1 | 1957–1957 |
| J. B. Preston Co. v. Funkhouser green | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.