person asserting privilege in New York

11 New York opinions name it 7 courts 1890–2026 1 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.

Followed or applied (5)

Case	Followed	Cited
Lingle v. Chevron U. S. A. Inc.green scotus · 2005 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026 2 sentences 2026"A predicate for any unconstitutional conditions claim is that the government could not have constitutionally ordered the person asserting the claim to do what it attempted to pressure that person into doing" ( id. at 612). 2026"A predicate for any unconstitutional conditions claim is that the government could not have constitutionally ordered the person asserting the claim to do what it attempted to pressure that person into doing" ( id. at 612 ).	1	1
Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist.green scotus · 2013 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026 2 sentences 2026For the Nollan / Dolan test to apply, there must be a "predicate" taking—that is, "the government could not have constitutionally ordered the person asserting the claim to do what it attempted to pressure that person into doing" ( Koontz , 570 US at 612). 2026For the Nollan / Dolan test to apply, there must be a "predicate" taking—that is, "the government could not have constitutionally ordered the person asserting the claim to do what it attempted to pressure that person into doing" ( Koontz , 570 US at 612 ).	1	1
People v. Drelichgreen nyappdiv · 1986 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 1 sentence 2011(See People v Drelich, 123 AD2d 441, 443 [2d Dept 1986].) The privilege applies to any communication between a person and a member of the clergy of any church.	1	1
Keenan v. Gigantegreen ny · 1979 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 1 sentence 2011(See Matter of Keenan v Gigante, 47 NY2d 160, 166-167 [1979].) As the person asserting the privilege, the defendant has the burden of establishing that all four criteria are met.	1	1
Lawrence v. . Browngreen · 1851 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 1937–1937 2 sentences 1937(Lawrence v. Brown, 5 N. Y. 394, 401 ; Jewett v. Miller, 10 id. 402, 409 ; Manufacturers’ & Traders Bank v. Hazard, 30 id. 226, 230; Continental Nat. 1937(Lawrence v. Brown, 5 N. Y. 394, 401 ; Jewett v. Miller, 10 id. 402, 409 ; Manufacturers’ & Traders Bank v. Hazard, 30 id. 226, 230; Continental Nat.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (12)

Case	Cited	Years
People v. Steele green ny · 1970 2 sentences 1998Giving defendant the benefit of the most favorable view of the record, as we must (see, People v Steele, 26 NY2d 526, 529 ), we conclude that there was evidence establishing each of the foregoing elements, requiring the justification defense to be submitted to the jury and disproved by the People beyond a reasonable doubt. 1998Giving defendant the benefit of the most favorable view of the record, as we must ( see , People v Steele , 26 N.Y.2d 526, 529 ), we conclude that there was evidence establishing each of the foregoing elements, requiring the justification defense to be submitted to the jury and disproved by the People beyond a reasonable doubt.	1	1998–1998
Priest v. Hennessy green ny · 1980 2 sentences 1986The person asserting the privilege has the burden of sustaining that claim (Matter of Priest v Hennessy, 51 NY2d 62, 69 ). 1986To make a valid claim of privilege, it must be shown that the information sought to be protected from disclosure was a "confidential communication” made to the attorney for the purpose of obtaining legal advice or services (Matter of Priest v Hennessy, supra; Matter of Jacqueline F., 47 NY2d 215, 219 ).	1	1986–1986
In re the Appointment of a Guardian for Jacqueline F. green ny · 1979 1 sentence 1986To make a valid claim of privilege, it must be shown that the information sought to be protected from disclosure was a "confidential communication” made to the attorney for the purpose of obtaining legal advice or services (Matter of Priest v Hennessy, supra; Matter of Jacqueline F., 47 NY2d 215, 219 ).	1	1986–1986
Fisher v. United States green scotus · 1976 1 sentence 1984The matter reached the Supreme Court which ruled, “As we noted in Fisher , the Fifth Amendment protects the person asserting the privilege only from compelled self-incrimination [ 425 US, at p 396 ].	1	1984–1984
Bloodgood v. Lynch green ny · 1944 1 sentence 1979(Bloodgood v Lynch, 293 NY 308, 314 , supra.) Since the attorneys do not set forth any facts indicating that any such information was received by them "in the course of professional employment” and it is not the kind of information which they would necessarily have received as a confidential communication in the course of professional employment, the court finds that the information requested under this second category is not privileged.	1	1979–1979
United States v. White green scotus · 1944 1 sentence 1977(United States v White, 322 US 694, 699 .) It follows, therefore, that there was not an independent privilege against self incrimination upon which the defendant, Beverly Winney, could rely.	1	1977–1977
In re the Estate of Green green nysurct · 1935 1 sentence 1960In Matter of La Due (5 A D 2d 52, 56), the court stated: “ A waiver or' release of something less than ‘ all rights in the estate of the other spouse ’ is not a compliance with the statute (Decedent Estate Law, § 18), and may not ‘ be deemed to be a waiver or release of the right of election as against any last will. ’ ” The burden of proving that a widow Avaived her right of election is on the person asserting the waiver (Matter of Brown, 202 Misc. 820 ; Matter of Guggenheim, 180 Misc. 833 ; Matter of Green, 155 Misc. 641 , affd. 246 App. Div. 583 ).	1	1960–1960
In re the Estate of Guggenheim neutral nysurct · 1943 1 sentence 1960In Matter of La Due (5 A D 2d 52, 56), the court stated: “ A waiver or' release of something less than ‘ all rights in the estate of the other spouse ’ is not a compliance with the statute (Decedent Estate Law, § 18), and may not ‘ be deemed to be a waiver or release of the right of election as against any last will. ’ ” The burden of proving that a widow Avaived her right of election is on the person asserting the waiver (Matter of Brown, 202 Misc. 820 ; Matter of Guggenheim, 180 Misc. 833 ; Matter of Green, 155 Misc. 641 , affd. 246 App. Div. 583 ).	1	1960–1960
In re the Estate of Brown neutral nysurct · 1952 1 sentence 1960In Matter of La Due (5 A D 2d 52, 56), the court stated: “ A waiver or' release of something less than ‘ all rights in the estate of the other spouse ’ is not a compliance with the statute (Decedent Estate Law, § 18), and may not ‘ be deemed to be a waiver or release of the right of election as against any last will. ’ ” The burden of proving that a widow Avaived her right of election is on the person asserting the waiver (Matter of Brown, 202 Misc. 820 ; Matter of Guggenheim, 180 Misc. 833 ; Matter of Green, 155 Misc. 641 , affd. 246 App. Div. 583 ).	1	1960–1960
Kempner v. Kenfield Manufacturing Co. green nyappdiv · 1935 1 sentence 1960In Matter of La Due (5 A D 2d 52, 56), the court stated: “ A waiver or' release of something less than ‘ all rights in the estate of the other spouse ’ is not a compliance with the statute (Decedent Estate Law, § 18), and may not ‘ be deemed to be a waiver or release of the right of election as against any last will. ’ ” The burden of proving that a widow Avaived her right of election is on the person asserting the waiver (Matter of Brown, 202 Misc. 820 ; Matter of Guggenheim, 180 Misc. 833 ; Matter of Green, 155 Misc. 641 , affd. 246 App. Div. 583 ).	1	1960–1960
In re the Estate of Derry neutral nysurct · 1936 1 sentence 1958The burden of sustaining the reasonableness of funeral expenses is upon the person asserting the claim, usually the undertaker, and merely alleging the reasonableness of the charge is not sufficient to sustain the burden of proof (Matter of Derry, 161 Misc. 135 ).	1	1958–1958
Walsh v. . Hartford Fire Insurance Co. green ny · 1878 1 sentence 1890Walsh v. Insurance Co., 73 N. Y. 5 .	1	1890–1890

Where else courts name it

OH 94 (1966–2025) CO 28 (1970–2026) TX 28 (1931–2026) PA 24 (1957–2024) ID 14 (1975–2017) CA 14 (1951–2025) NY 11 (1890–2026) GA 10 (1976–2025) MI 9 (1955–2017) NJ 7 (1985–2020) IN 7 (1978–2025) WI 7 (1996–2025) IL 7 (1957–2014) MD 6 (1970–2004) KS 6 (1982–2022) MO 6 (1961–2023) WV 6 (1948–2011) NC 5 (2014–2022) UT 5 (1984–2014) MN 5 (1983–2025) AL 4 (1914–2014) AR 4 (1892–1994) AZ 4 (1921–2026) ME 4 (1982–2025) WA 4 (1974–2024) CT 4 (1992–2019) NE 3 (1927–2017) LA 3 (1983–2015) VA 3 (1992–2003) IA 3 (1986–2011) VT 2 (1914–2020) ND 2 (1911–2010) OR 2 (1974–1976) DC 2 (1987–2003) HI 2 (2001–2006) MA 2 (2003–2015) SD 2 (2005–2014) DE 2 (1970–2017) SC 2 (1984–2003) NV 2 (2017–2017) MT 2 (1994–1998)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check