absence of any statutory requirement in New York

1996Hence, "in the absence of any statutory requirement for corroboration * * * the sworn testimony of a child complainant under the age of 12 need not be corroborated in a prosecution for her forcible rape” (People v Fuller, 50 NY2d 628, 631 ; see, People v Bell, 116 AD2d 847, 848-849 ).

1986That case, decided in 1980 (prior to the amendment of Penal Law § 130.16), held that "in the absence of any statutory requirement for corroboration, consonant with the reflection of social attitudes in prevailing legislative policy, the sworn testimony of a child complainant under the age of 12 need not be corroborated in a prosecution for her forcible rape.” ( 50 NY2d, at p 631 .) Subsequent thereto, the Legislature amended the statute, striking the need for corroboration, not only in the case of forcible sex crimes, but also in sex crimes based upon the age of the complainant.

1998Corp., 81 NY2d 982 ; Gallagher v St.

1998However, even in the absence of any statutory violation, a negligence claim may still be established under the common law (see, Kellman v 45 Tiemann Assocs., 87 NY2d 871 ; Lesocovich v 180 Madison Ave.

1996While corroboration of a minor’s testimony may be necessary if the child is unable to understand the nature of an oath (see, CPL 60.20 [3]), County Court, after an extensive voir dire, determined that the victim understood the nature of the oath and that she was competent to give sworn testimony (see, People v Morales, 80 NY2d 450, 452 ; People v Fuller, supra, at 631 ; People v Charlton, 192 AD2d 757, 758 , lv denied 81 NY2d 1071 ).

1996While corroboration of a minor’s testimony may be necessary if the child is unable to understand the nature of an oath (see, CPL 60.20 [3]), County Court, after an extensive voir dire, determined that the victim understood the nature of the oath and that she was competent to give sworn testimony (see, People v Morales, 80 NY2d 450, 452 ; People v Fuller, supra, at 631 ; People v Charlton, 192 AD2d 757, 758 , lv denied 81 NY2d 1071 ).

1986The court, in Fuller (supra), distinguished the cases of People v Oyola ( 6 NY2d 259 ) and People v Porcaro ( 6 NY2d 248 ), finding in both cases that the requirement of corroboration was not decisive.

1986The court, in Fuller (supra), distinguished the cases of People v Oyola ( 6 NY2d 259 ) and People v Porcaro ( 6 NY2d 248 ), finding in both cases that the requirement of corroboration was not decisive.

1984The owners need only offer mobile home tenants an initial one-year lease, which was done here, because in the absence of any statutory requirement for renewal leases we should not impinge further on the mobile home park owner’s freedom to contract (Comorford v Jones, 121 Misc 2d 141 ; A.K.A.B. & E.

1984Mobile Home Rentals v Marshall, 114 Misc 2d 622 ).

1980In the absence of any statutory immunity, traditional principles of common law establish a bank’s liability for the wrongful disposal of a depositor’s funds (International Aircraft Trading Co. v Manufacturers Trust Co., 297 NY 285 ).

1954Y. 920; Matter of Sima v. Board of Standards & Appeals of City of N. Y278 App. Div. 785, and 359 W. 34th St., Inc., v. Board of Standarads é Appeals of City of N. Y., 279 App. Div. 1032 , affd. 305 N. Y. 878 .) Moreover, in the absence of any statutory requirement therefor, special hardship need not be established where an area variance is involved.

1954Y. 920; Matter of Sima v. Board of Standards & Appeals of City of N. Y278 App. Div. 785, and 359 W. 34th St., Inc., v. Board of Standarads é Appeals of City of N. Y., 279 App. Div. 1032 , affd. 305 N. Y. 878 .) Moreover, in the absence of any statutory requirement therefor, special hardship need not be established where an area variance is involved.

1954(Matter of Kelly v. Mwrdoch, 275 App. Div. 786 ; 359 W. 34th St., Inc., v. Board of Standards é Appeals of City of N. Y., supra; Matter of Leone v. Yates, 280 App. Div. 823 ; Matter of Atlantic Beach Property Owners’ Assn. v. Bichter, 281 App. Div. 769 .) Section 154 of the ordinance provides adequate standards to limit and define the board’s discretionary powers.

1954(Matter of Kelly v. Mwrdoch, 275 App. Div. 786 ; 359 W. 34th St., Inc., v. Board of Standards é Appeals of City of N. Y., supra; Matter of Leone v. Yates, 280 App. Div. 823 ; Matter of Atlantic Beach Property Owners’ Assn. v. Bichter, 281 App. Div. 769 .) Section 154 of the ordinance provides adequate standards to limit and define the board’s discretionary powers.

1946Yet the United States Supreme Court has upheld the validity of statutes, similar to our Abandoned Property Law, which have been directed at savings banks (Provident Savings Institution v. Malone, 221 U. S. 660 , supra; Security Bank v. California, 263 U. S. 282 , supra), notwithstanding the absence of any statutory requirement that the bank books be produced.

1946Yet the United States Supreme Court has upheld the validity of statutes, similar to our Abandoned Property Law, which have been directed at savings banks (Provident Savings Institution v. Malone, 221 U. S. 660 , supra; Security Bank v. California, 263 U. S. 282 , supra), notwithstanding the absence of any statutory requirement that the bank books be produced.

1945In the absence of any statutory requirement it should also be noted that even in a criminal trial, prior to the enactment of section 399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a defendant might have been convicted on the testimony of an accomplice alone (Stape v. People of the State of New York, 85 N. Y. 390 ; People v. Everhardt, 104 N. Y. 591 ).

1945In the absence of any statutory requirement it should also be noted that even in a criminal trial, prior to the enactment of section 399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a defendant might have been convicted on the testimony of an accomplice alone (Stape v. People of the State of New York, 85 N. Y. 390 ; People v. Everhardt, 104 N. Y. 591 ).