allegations claim in New York

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2024Analysis It is well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the allegations in the claim to be true and afford claimant "the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory." ( Id .; see Morone v Morone , 50 NY2d 481, 484 , [1980]; Rovello v Orofino R

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2024Analysis It is well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the allegations in the claim to be true and afford claimant "the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory." ( Id .; see Morone v Morone , 50 NY2d 481, 484 , [1980]; Rovello v Orofino R

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2024Analysis It is well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the allegations in the claim to be true and afford claimant "the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory." ( Id .; see Morone v Morone , 50 NY2d 481, 484 , [1980]; Rovello v Orofino R

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2024Analysis It is well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the allegations in the claim to be true and afford claimant "the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory." ( Id .; see Morone v Morone , 50 NY2d 481, 484 , [1980]; Rovello v Orofino R

2023Condominium v Vitruvius Estates LLC , 204 AD3d 465, 465-466 [1st Dept 2022]).

2023Condominium v Vitruvius Estates LLC , 204 AD3d 465, 465-466 [1st Dept 2022]).

2010The allegations in defense counsel’s supporting affirmation concerning defendant’s expectation of privacy in the [apartment] served only to raise standing as an issue of fact and avoid summary judgment under CPL 710.60 (3)” (People v Washington, 39 AD3d 1228, 1229 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 870 [2007] [internal quotation marks omitted]; cf. People v Telfer, 175 AD2d 638 [1991], lv denied 78 NY2d 1130 [1991]; see generally People v Trotter, 224 AD2d 1013 [1996]).

2007The allegations in defense counsel’s supporting affirmation concerning defendant’s expectation of privacy in the garage “served only to ‘raise standing as an issue of fact and avoid summary judgment under CPL 710.60 (3)’ ” (Trotter, 224 AD2d at 1014 , quoting Whitfield, 81 NY2d at 906 ).

2008Furthermore, the allegations in the claim coupled with this Court’s decision vacating his conviction and dismissing the indictment sufficiently demonstrated claimant’s likelihood of succeeding at trial in proving that “(a) he did not commit any of the acts charged in the accusatory instrument or his acts or omissions charged in the accusatory instrument did not constitute a felony or misdemeanor against the state, and (b) he did not by his own conduct cause or bring about his conviction” (Court of Claims Act § 8-b [4]; see Dozier v State of New York, 134 AD2d 759, 761-762 [1987]; Lanza, 130 AD

1989In other words, the allegations in the claim must be of such character that, if believed, they would clearly and convincingly establish the elements of the claim, so as to set forth a cause of action (Dozier v State of New York, 134 AD2d 759 [1987]).

2007Finally, the Court of Appeals, In the Matter of Edwin L. , supra , held that: the requirements of procedural due process are satisfied when a Family Court determines, after conducting an inquiry into the allegations of the violation petition, and providing the juvenile with the opportunity to respond to those allegations, that there is a legitimate basis for concluding that a juvenile has violated a condition of the ACD order and states the reasons, on the record, for reaching the determination.

2006The Family Court properly accepted the appellant’s admission to the allegations of the violation of probation petition against him (see Family Ct Act § 360.3 [1], [2]; § 321.3 [1]; Matter of Ricky A., 11 AD3d 532 [2004]; see also Matter of Edwin L., 88 NY2d 593 [1996]; Matter of Louis W., 282 AD2d 686 [2001]).

2025Enabling the defendant to investigate the claim promptly and ascertain its liability is the "guiding principle" that informs section 11 (b). ( Martinez v State of New York , 215 AD3d 815 , 817 [2d Dept 2023] quoting Lepkowski v State of New York , 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003].) It is also well settled that when reviewing a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 on the ground that the claim fails to state a cause of action, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction. ( See CPLR 3026; see also Leon v Martinez , 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994].) In deciding the motion, the Court must deem the alle

2023As to the merits of the petition, Surrogate's Court should consider "the time commitment involved, the relative difficulty of the matter, the nature of the services provided, counsel's experience and the results obtained" when fixing counsel fees ( Matter of Middagh , 267 AD2d at 593-594 ; see Matter of Drossos , 26 AD3d 602, 603 [3d Dept 2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 702 [2006], lv dismissed 7 NY3d 807 [2006]).

2023"The determination whether a claimant's statement of the 'time when' the claim arose is sufficiently definite to enable the State to investigate and ascertain its liability under the circumstances is a sui generis determination depending upon the nature of the claim and specificity of allegations set forth in the claim" ( Fenton v State of New York , 213 AD3d 737, 739 [2d Dept 2023]).

2023As to the merits of the petition, Surrogate's Court should consider "the time commitment involved, the relative difficulty of the matter, the nature of the services provided, counsel's experience and the results obtained" when fixing counsel fees ( Matter of Middagh , 267 AD2d at 593-594 ; see Matter of Drossos , 26 AD3d 602, 603 [3d Dept 2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 702 [2006], lv dismissed 7 NY3d 807 [2006]).

2021Contrary to claimants' contention, we conclude that those principles apply to the circumstances of this case in which, according to the allegations in the claim, defendant's construction of a curb allegedly prevented water from discharging through defendant's land, causing it to saturate the ground and flood the surface of claimants' property ( see generally Barkley , 86 NY at 144-148 ; Robb v State of New York , 262 App Div 37, 38 [4th Dept 1941]).

2021Here, defendant met its initial burden on the motion by establishing both that artificial means were not used to effect the diversion of water and that the improvements were made in good faith as part of a larger road improvement project ( cf. Kane , 255 AD2d at 917 ), and claimants failed to raise an issue of material fact in opposition ( see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp. , 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]).

2020However, it is unclear what occurred between July 20, 2015 and August 12, 2016, and the ambiguity is not resolved by the documentary evidence, including defendants' unilateral statement in their August 12, 2016 letter that the "First" Option Period would now commence, which cannot, in and of itself, negate the complaint's allegation that, instead, it was the Second Option Period that commenced at that time ( Amsterdam Hospitality Group, LLC v Marshal-Alan Assoc., Inc. , 120 AD3d 431, 432-434 [1st Dept 2014]).