Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 New York opinions name it 2 courts 1987–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Watergate II Apartments v. Buffalo Sewer Authoritygreen1 sentence2025Conservation , 68 AD3d 1709 , 1710 [4th Dept 2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 707 [2010]; see generally Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth. , 46 NY2d 52, 57 [1978]). | 1 | 1 |
Elson v. Defrengreen1 sentence2018A motion to clarify is a procedure designed solely "to correct errors or omissions in form, for clarification or to make the order conform more accurately to the decision" ( Simon v Mehryari , 16 AD3d 664, 666 [2005]; accord Matter of Torpey v Town of Colonie, N.Y. , 107 AD3d 1124, 1125-1126 [2013]; see Elson v Defren , 283 AD2d 109, 113 [2001]; Gannon v Johnson Scale Co. , 189 AD2d 1052, 1052 [1993]). | 1 | 1 |
Torpey v. Town of Coloniegreen1 sentence2018A motion to clarify is a procedure designed solely "to correct errors or omissions in form, for clarification or to make the order conform more accurately to the decision" ( Simon v Mehryari , 16 AD3d 664, 666 [2005]; accord Matter of Torpey v Town of Colonie, N.Y. , 107 AD3d 1124, 1125-1126 [2013]; see Elson v Defren , 283 AD2d 109, 113 [2001]; Gannon v Johnson Scale Co. , 189 AD2d 1052, 1052 [1993]). | 1 | 1 |
Gannon v. Johnson Scale Co.green1 sentence2018A motion to clarify is a procedure designed solely "to correct errors or omissions in form, for clarification or to make the order conform more accurately to the decision" ( Simon v Mehryari , 16 AD3d 664, 666 [2005]; accord Matter of Torpey v Town of Colonie, N.Y. , 107 AD3d 1124, 1125-1126 [2013]; see Elson v Defren , 283 AD2d 109, 113 [2001]; Gannon v Johnson Scale Co. , 189 AD2d 1052, 1052 [1993]). | 1 | 1 |
Simon v. Mehryarigreen1 sentence2018A motion to clarify is a procedure designed solely "to correct errors or omissions in form, for clarification or to make the order conform more accurately to the decision" ( Simon v Mehryari , 16 AD3d 664, 666 [2005]; accord Matter of Torpey v Town of Colonie, N.Y. , 107 AD3d 1124, 1125-1126 [2013]; see Elson v Defren , 283 AD2d 109, 113 [2001]; Gannon v Johnson Scale Co. , 189 AD2d 1052, 1052 [1993]). | 1 | 1 |
Sullivan County Harness Racing Ass'n v. Glassergreen1 sentence2018It is settled that administrative agencies have the inherent authority to reconsider a prior determination upon a change in circumstances or new information ( see Matter of Sullivan County Harness Racing Assn. v Glasser , 30 NY2d 269, 277 [1972]; Matter of Town of N. Elba v New York State Dept. of Envtl. | 1 | 1 |
Carney's Restaurant, Inc. v. Stategreen1 sentence2017The petitioners/plaintiffs’ contention that Zahav did not receive fair notice of the charges against it is without merit. “[I]n the administrative forum, the charges need only be reasonably specific, in light of all the relevant circumstances, to apprise the party whose rights are being determined of the charges against him and to allow for the preparation of an adequate defense” (Matter of Block v Ambach, 73 NY2d 323, 333 [1989] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Carney’s Rest., Inc. v State of New York, 89 AD3d 1250, 1254 [2011]; Matter of Electchester Hous. | 1 | 1 |
Block v. Ambachgreen1 sentence2017The petitioners/plaintiffs’ contention that Zahav did not receive fair notice of the charges against it is without merit. “[I]n the administrative forum, the charges need only be reasonably specific, in light of all the relevant circumstances, to apprise the party whose rights are being determined of the charges against him and to allow for the preparation of an adequate defense” (Matter of Block v Ambach, 73 NY2d 323, 333 [1989] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Carney’s Rest., Inc. v State of New York, 89 AD3d 1250, 1254 [2011]; Matter of Electchester Hous. | 1 | 1 |
Association for a Better Long Island, Inc. v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservationgreen1 sentence2014Supreme Court granted DEC’s motion and dismissed the proceeding, finding both that the causes of action were not ripe and that petitioners did not have standing ( 35 Misc 3d 786, 797 [Sup Ct, Albany County 2011]). | 1 | 1 |
Liberman v. Gelsteingreen1 sentence2000Assuming defendant’s characterizations of plaintiffs acts were entirely baseless, these accusations constitute the imputation of unlawful behavior amounting to no more than minor offenses which are not actionable without proof of damages (see, Liberman v Gelstein, supra, at 435). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
PLP v. New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation
neutral
1 sentence2025Conservation , 68 AD3d 1709 , 1710 [4th Dept 2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 707 [2010]; see generally Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth. , 46 NY2d 52, 57 [1978]). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
PLP, II LP v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
neutral
1 sentence2025Conservation , 68 AD3d 1709 , 1710 [4th Dept 2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 707 [2010]; see generally Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth. , 46 NY2d 52, 57 [1978]). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Matter of Town of Cambria v. New York Off. of Renewable Energy Siting
green
1 sentence2025Inasmuch as petitioner failed to exhaust its administrative remedies, Supreme Court properly granted the DEC's motion ( see Matter of Town of Cambria v New York Off. of Renewable Energy Siting , 228 AD3d 1336 , 1341 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 [*2]NY3d 912 [2025]; PLP, II LP v New York State Dept. of Envtl. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
New York Civil Liberties Union v. State
green
1 sentence2022Liberties Union v State of New York , 4 NY3d 175, 184 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Brusco v. Braun
green
1 sentence2022The Supreme Court properly granted the DEC's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it. "[T]he remedy of mandamus is available to compel a governmental entity or officer to perform a ministerial duty, but does not lie to compel an act which involves an exercise of judgment or discretion" ( Matter of Brusco v Braun , 84 NY2d 674 , [*3]679; see New York Civ. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Association for a Better Long Island, Inc. v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
neutral
1 sentence2014The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding that, although the procedural claims were ripe, petitioners lacked standing on any claim by virtue of their failure to allege an injury-in-fact ( 97 AD3d 1085 , 1086 [3d Dept 2012]). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Baker v. Board of Education
green
1 sentence1997"An employer cannot extinguish an employee’s rights under a collective bargaining agreement by simply terminating the employment” (Baker v Board of Educ., 70 NY2d 314, 323 ). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Pell v. Board of Education
green
1 sentence1992Accordingly, the penalty determination, to the extent not conceded, should be sustained as it is supported by substantial evidence and does not shock our sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., supra). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Wedinger v. Goldberger
neutral
1 sentence1987Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion to dismiss is granted (see, Matter of Wedinger v Goldberger, 129 AD2d 712 [decided herewith]). | 1 | 1987–1987 |