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.
8 New York opinions name it 1 courts 2011–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Johnson-Roberts v. Ira Judelson Bail Bondsgreen2 sentences2024The court providently exercised its discretion in concluding that plaintiffs failed to proffer either a reasonable excuse for the default or a meritorious defense to Alliance's motion ( see Johnson-Roberts v Ira Judelson Bail Bonds , 140 AD3d 509, 509 [1st Dept 2016]; see also Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. 2024The court providently exercised its discretion in concluding that plaintiffs failed to proffer either a reasonable excuse for the default or a meritorious defense to Alliance's motion ( see Johnson-Roberts v Ira Judelson Bail Bonds , 140 AD3d 509, 509 [1st Dept 2016]; see also Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. | 2 | 2 |
Bono v. Halben's Tire City, Inc.green2 sentences2013The Supreme Court denied those branches of Alliance’s motion. “ ‘Because a finding of negligence must be based on the breach of a duty, a threshold question in tort cases is whether the alleged tortfeasor owed a duty of care to the injured party’ ” (Bono v Halben’s Tire City, Inc., 84 AD3d 1137, 1139 [2011], quoting Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 138 [2002]). “[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party” (Stiver v Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 9 NY3d 253, 257 [2007]). 2013The Supreme Court denied those branches of Alliance’s motion. “ ‘Because a finding of negligence must be based on the breach of a duty, a threshold question in tort cases is whether the alleged tortfeasor owed a duty of care to the injured party’ ” (Bono v Halben’s Tire City, Inc., 84 AD3d 1137, 1139 [2011], quoting Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 138 [2002]). “[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party” (Stiver v Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 9 NY3d 253, 257 [2007]). | 2 | 2 |
Espinal v. Melville Snow Contractors, Inc.green2 sentences2013The Supreme Court denied those branches of Alliance’s motion. “ ‘Because a finding of negligence must be based on the breach of a duty, a threshold question in tort cases is whether the alleged tortfeasor owed a duty of care to the injured party’ ” (Bono v Halben’s Tire City, Inc., 84 AD3d 1137, 1139 [2011], quoting Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 138 [2002]). “[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party” (Stiver v Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 9 NY3d 253, 257 [2007]). 2013The Supreme Court denied those branches of Alliance’s motion. “ ‘Because a finding of negligence must be based on the breach of a duty, a threshold question in tort cases is whether the alleged tortfeasor owed a duty of care to the injured party’ ” (Bono v Halben’s Tire City, Inc., 84 AD3d 1137, 1139 [2011], quoting Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 138 [2002]). “[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party” (Stiver v Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 9 NY3d 253, 257 [2007]). | 2 | 2 |
Stiver v. Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc.green2 sentences2013The Supreme Court denied those branches of Alliance’s motion. “ ‘Because a finding of negligence must be based on the breach of a duty, a threshold question in tort cases is whether the alleged tortfeasor owed a duty of care to the injured party’ ” (Bono v Halben’s Tire City, Inc., 84 AD3d 1137, 1139 [2011], quoting Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 138 [2002]). “[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party” (Stiver v Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 9 NY3d 253, 257 [2007]). 2013The Supreme Court denied those branches of Alliance’s motion. “ ‘Because a finding of negligence must be based on the breach of a duty, a threshold question in tort cases is whether the alleged tortfeasor owed a duty of care to the injured party’ ” (Bono v Halben’s Tire City, Inc., 84 AD3d 1137, 1139 [2011], quoting Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., 98 NY2d 136, 138 [2002]). “[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party” (Stiver v Good & Fair Carting & Moving, Inc., 9 NY3d 253, 257 [2007]). | 2 | 2 |
Claim of McCurty v. Syracuse Universitygreen1 sentence2015We find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in declining to reconsider the manner in which the WCLJ applied the apportionment percentages (see Matter of McCurty v Syracuse Univ., 34 AD3d 1012, 1013 [2006]) and further that this issue is not properly before this Court (see Matter of Harris v Phoenix Cent. | 1 | 1 |
During v. City of New Rochellegreen1 sentence2011In its notice for discovery and inspection dated August 12, 2008, Alliance demanded the “names and addresses of all witnesses with regard to plaintiffs’ claim of support (economic, monetary or otherwise) provided to any distributee.” The Supreme Court granted that branch of Alliance’s motion which was to compel discovery of those witnesses, but only to the extent of directing the plaintiffs to provide “a list of all family members who are witnesses.” Since the plaintiffs did not object to this demand, and the information is neither privileged nor palpably improper, Alliance is entitled to the | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Heng Ren Silk Rd. Invs. LLC v. Duff & Phelps, LLC
green
2 sentences2024No appeal lies from an order entered upon default of the appealing party, so plaintiffs' appeal from the court's order granting Alliance's motion in the absence of opposition must be dismissed ( see Hilton Wiener, LLC v Anderson , 203 AD3d 659 [1st Dept 2022], lv denied 39 NY3d 902 [2022]). 2024No appeal lies from an order entered upon default of the appealing party, so plaintiffs' appeal from the court's order granting Alliance's motion in the absence of opposition must be dismissed ( see Hilton Wiener, LLC v Anderson , 203 AD3d 659 [1st Dept 2022], lv denied 39 NY3d 902 [2022]). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
In re Aho
green
1 sentence2019The appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of Alliance's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of the judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against Alliance ( see Matter of Aho , 39 NY2d 241, 248 ). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Uadi, Inc. v. Stern
green
1 sentence2015Although leave to amend a complaint should be freely given {see CPLR 3025 [b]), a court should deny a motion for leave to amend a complaint if the proposed amendment is palpably insufficient, would prejudice or surprise the defendant, or is patently devoid of merit (see Martin v Village of Freeport, 71 AD3d 745 [2010]; Uadi, Inc. v Stern, 67 AD3d 899 [2009]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Martin v. Village of Freeport
green
1 sentence2015Although leave to amend a complaint should be freely given {see CPLR 3025 [b]), a court should deny a motion for leave to amend a complaint if the proposed amendment is palpably insufficient, would prejudice or surprise the defendant, or is patently devoid of merit (see Martin v Village of Freeport, 71 AD3d 745 [2010]; Uadi, Inc. v Stern, 67 AD3d 899 [2009]). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.