relationship between claim in New York

2023In other words, jurisdiction will not be present "where the relationship between the claim and transaction is too attenuated" ( Johnson v Ward , 4 NY3d 516, 519 [2005]).

2017The nexus is insufficient where the relationship between the claim and transaction is “too attenuated” or “merely coincidental” (Johnson v Ward, 4 NY3d 516, 520 [2005]).

2012We therefore further modify the determination by vacating the recommended loss of good time, and we remit the matter to respondent for reconsideration of that recommendation (see Matter of Monroe v Fischer, 87 AD3d 1300, 1301 [2011]).

2012We therefore further modify the determination by vacating the recommended loss of good time, and we remit the matter to respondent for reconsideration of that recommendation (see Matter of Monroe v Fischer, 87 AD3d 1300, 1301 [2011]).

2015Under the circumstances, County Court’s choice to accurately answer the questions that the jury asked without going beyond the jury’s request was within the court’s discretion and appropriately responsive (see CPL 310.30; People v Almodovar, 62 NY2d 126, 131-132 [1984]; People v Acevedo, 118 AD3d 1103, 1107-1108 [2014]; People v Williams, 28 AD3d 1005, 1010 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 819 [2006]).

2000The court’s supplemental charge was entirely proper given the specific information requested by the deliberating jury (People v Almodovar, 62 NY2d 126 ).

2025Among other things, the court stated that the presumption of innocence "no longer lies" when a defendant chooses to testify, and, even more directly, that "[o]nce the defendant takes the stand there is a different burden." Notwithstanding that the court instructed the trial jury accurately and at length with regard to the presumption in its preliminary instructions, in another instruction at a break in the testimony of the first witness, and in its closing instructions, the court did not satisfy the requirement, clearly enunciated in People v Harrison (85 NY2d 891 [1995]), that "to obviate an

2025Among other things, the court stated that the presumption of innocence "no longer lies" when a defendant chooses to testify, and, even more directly, that "[o]nce the defendant takes the stand there is a different burden." Notwithstanding that the court instructed the trial jury accurately and at length with regard to the presumption in its preliminary instructions, in another instruction at a break in the testimony of the first witness, and in its closing instructions, the court did not satisfy the requirement, clearly enunciated in People v Harrison (85 NY2d 891 [1995]), that "to obviate an

2025NO. 24 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/08/2025 there can be no jurisdiction “where the relationship between the claim and transaction is too attenuated.” Copp v. Ramirez, 62 A.D.3d 23, 28 (1st Dept. 2009).

2025Selections, S.L. v Bodega Olegario Falcon Pineiro, 29 NY3d 292, 298-99 [2017]). “[A]n articulable nexus or substantial relationship exists ‘where at least one element arises from the New York contacts’ rather than ‘every element of the cause of action pleaded[.]’ The nexus is insufficient where the relationship between the claim and transaction is ‘too attenuated’ or ‘merely coincidental’” (id. [citations omitted]).

2018While another witness's competence to offer expert interpretation of the relationship between the test results and defendant's actual blood alcohol content was established at the trial ( see People v Brown , 13 NY3d 332, 340 [2009]), the substitute witness's interpretation is of no weight in the absence of testimony by a trained observer as to the procedure employed to activate and operate the device's self-diagnostic and self-calibrating pre-test functions, and to determine, aided by the absence of "audible" signals, that, in fact, the instrument had passed those diagnostic and calibrating fu

2017If a prior relationship between defense counsel and the People’s witness is shown, the court must conduct a careful and thorough inquiry to determine whether an actual conflict exists (People v Smart, 96 NY2d 793, 795-796 [2001]).

2017After the inquiry, it is within the sound discretion of the court to substitute or relieve an attorney on conflict grounds (People v Gomberg, 38 NY2d 307, 314 [1975]).

2015Under the circumstances, County Court’s choice to accurately answer the questions that the jury asked without going beyond the jury’s request was within the court’s discretion and appropriately responsive (see CPL 310.30; People v Almodovar, 62 NY2d 126, 131-132 [1984]; People v Acevedo, 118 AD3d 1103, 1107-1108 [2014]; People v Williams, 28 AD3d 1005, 1010 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 819 [2006]).

2015Under the circumstances, County Court’s choice to accurately answer the questions that the jury asked without going beyond the jury’s request was within the court’s discretion and appropriately responsive (see CPL 310.30; People v Almodovar, 62 NY2d 126, 131-132 [1984]; People v Acevedo, 118 AD3d 1103, 1107-1108 [2014]; People v Williams, 28 AD3d 1005, 1010 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 819 [2006]).

2009Under the statute, “proof of one transaction in New York is sufficient to invoke jurisdiction ... so long as the defendant’s activities here were purposeful and there is a substantial relationship between the transaction and the claim asserted” (Kreutter v McFadden Oil Corp., 71 NY2d 460, 467 [1988]). “[jurisdiction is not justified where the relationship between the claim and transaction is too attenuated” (Johnson, 4 NY3d at 520 ).

2005Talbot v Johnson Newspaper Corp., 71 NY2d 827, 829 [1988] [holding that the nexus between a coach’s defamation action and a former student’s pursuit of a college degree in New York was insufficient to support jurisdiction]).

1999(See, Janis v Janis, supra, at 204.) The constitutional prohibition against unwarranted intrusion by Federal law upon administration of the State’s police power, together with the absence of a significant relationship between the requirement of this predicate notice and the administration of the estate of a residential debtor, mandate a holding that the automatic stay provision does not apply to service of the predicate notice.