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.
7 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1952–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ross v. State of New Yorkgreen2 sentences2026Additionally, claimant's contention that the anti-assignment clause was ambiguous is unpreserved, as he failed to raise it before the Court of Claims ( see Singh v State of New York , 240 AD3d 1022 , 1024 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 45 NY3d 901 [2026]; Ross v State of New York , 217 AD3d 1225, 1226 [3d Dept 2023]). 2026Additionally, claimant's contention that the anti-assignment clause was ambiguous is unpreserved, as he failed to raise it before the Court of Claims ( see Singh v State of New York , 240 AD3d 1022, 1024 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 45 NY3d 901 [2026]; Ross v State of New York , 217 AD3d 1225, 1226 [3d Dept 2023]). | 1 | 1 |
Singh v. State of New Yorkgreen2 sentences2026Additionally, claimant's contention that the anti-assignment clause was ambiguous is unpreserved, as he failed to raise it before the Court of Claims ( see Singh v State of New York , 240 AD3d 1022 , 1024 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 45 NY3d 901 [2026]; Ross v State of New York , 217 AD3d 1225, 1226 [3d Dept 2023]). 2026Additionally, claimant's contention that the anti-assignment clause was ambiguous is unpreserved, as he failed to raise it before the Court of Claims ( see Singh v State of New York , 240 AD3d 1022, 1024 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 45 NY3d 901 [2026]; Ross v State of New York , 217 AD3d 1225, 1226 [3d Dept 2023]). | 1 | 1 |
Brettler v. Allianz Life Insurance Company of North Americagreen1 sentence2023As noted by the Second Circuit, the Notice Provision does not restrict the policy owner’s power to assign, Allianz does not take any position on the validity of assignments between third parties, and Allianz does not retain any discretion to impede or refuse assignments (see 57 F4th at 63). | 1 | 1 |
Sillman v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.green1 sentence2023In contrast, an anti-assignment clause prohibits unilateral assignments either by voiding the assignment entirely or by encumbering it by requiring the non-assigning party to approve or consent to any assignment of the contract (see Allhusen, 303 NY at 449 [contract providing assignments “without the written consent of the first party . . . shall be void” could void assignments]; Sillman v Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 NY2d 395, 400 [1957] [contract requiring prior written consent before assignment and stating that the paying party “shall not be required to recognize any assignments” cou | 1 | 1 |
Allhusen v. Caristo Construction Corp.green2 sentences2023If an anti-assignment clause does not include such language, the assignment is valid, and the clause is read instead as a personal covenant not to assign that “justifies only an award of damages” against the assignor for breach (Citibank, N.A. v Tele/Res., Inc., 724 F2d 266, 268 [2d Cir 1983]; see also Allhusen, 303 NY at 450 ). 2023Under New York law, such clauses are subject to a special interpretative rule: If an anti- assignment clause includes “clear language” and the “plainest words” stating that an assignment made in contravention of the original contract is void, then the clause operates to destroy any purported assignments (Allhusen v Caristo Const. Corp., 303 NY 446, 452 [1952], citing State Bank v Cent. | 1 | 1 |
State Bank v. Central Mercantile Bankgreen1 sentence2023Mercantile Bank of New York, 248 NY 428, 435 [1928]). | 1 | 1 |
In Re the Marriage of Mikesellgreen2 sentences2015(See In re Marriage of Triggs, 2011 Wash App LEXIS 1997, *37-38 [Aug. 25, 2011, No. 28489-1-III] [other states reviewing the issue have relied upon 42 USC § 659 (a)—an exception to the anti-assignment clause of the Social Security Act ( 42 USC § 407 [a])] which allows benefits to be garnished for the payment of child support or maintenance obligations—as permitting maintenance awards from federal benefit payments, including Social Security benefits]; Evans v Evans, 111 NC App 792, 798-799, 434 SE2d 856, 860-861 [1993] [concluding that 42 USC § 407 (a) does not bar a maintenance award of Social 2015(See In re Marriage of Triggs, 2011 Wash App LEXIS 1997, *37-38 [Aug. 25, 2011, No. 28489-1-III] [other states reviewing the issue have relied upon 42 USC § 659 (a)—an exception to the anti-assignment clause of the Social Security Act ( 42 USC § 407 [a])] which allows benefits to be garnished for the payment of child support or maintenance obligations—as permitting maintenance awards from federal benefit payments, including Social Security benefits]; Evans v Evans, 111 NC App 792, 798-799, 434 SE2d 856, 860-861 [1993] [concluding that 42 USC § 407 (a) does not bar a maintenance award of Social | 1 | 1 |
Lanier v. Laniergreen1 sentence2015(See In re Marriage of Triggs, 2011 Wash App LEXIS 1997, *37-38 [Aug. 25, 2011, No. 28489-1-III] [other states reviewing the issue have relied upon 42 USC § 659 (a)—an exception to the anti-assignment clause of the Social Security Act ( 42 USC § 407 [a])] which allows benefits to be garnished for the payment of child support or maintenance obligations—as permitting maintenance awards from federal benefit payments, including Social Security benefits]; Evans v Evans, 111 NC App 792, 798-799, 434 SE2d 856, 860-861 [1993] [concluding that 42 USC § 407 (a) does not bar a maintenance award of Social | 1 | 1 |
Evans v. Evansgreen1 sentence2015(See In re Marriage of Triggs, 2011 Wash App LEXIS 1997, *37-38 [Aug. 25, 2011, No. 28489-1-III] [other states reviewing the issue have relied upon 42 USC § 659 (a)—an exception to the anti-assignment clause of the Social Security Act ( 42 USC § 407 [a])] which allows benefits to be garnished for the payment of child support or maintenance obligations—as permitting maintenance awards from federal benefit payments, including Social Security benefits]; Evans v Evans, 111 NC App 792, 798-799, 434 SE2d 856, 860-861 [1993] [concluding that 42 USC § 407 (a) does not bar a maintenance award of Social | 1 | 1 |
Boggs v. Boggsgreen1 sentence2002This exception to ERISA’s anti-assignment rule is not subject to judicial expansion (see Boggs v Boggs, 520 US 833, 851 [1997]). | 1 | 1 |
McDermott v. McDermottgreen2 sentences1993The revolutionary enactment of the Equitable Distribution Law in 1980 (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B]) recognized that marriage is an "economic partnership” that each spouse has individually contributed to during the marriage (O’Brien v O’Brien, 66 NY2d 576, 583 ; see also, McDermott, supra, at 378-380). 1993Equating the rights of the spouse and dependents with those of any other creditor for purposes of applying the anti-assignment rule is no longer justified, however (see, McDermott, 119 AD2d, at 377 , supra; see also, Matter of Wanamaker v Wanamaker, 93 Misc 2d 784 ). | 1 | 1 |
Wanamaker v. Wanamakergreen1 sentence1993Equating the rights of the spouse and dependents with those of any other creditor for purposes of applying the anti-assignment rule is no longer justified, however (see, McDermott, 119 AD2d, at 377 , supra; see also, Matter of Wanamaker v Wanamaker, 93 Misc 2d 784 ). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Belge v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
green
1 sentence2023Co., 39 AD2d 295, 296 , 297-298 [1972] [same where contract required “written consent of the Seller” for assignments]; University Mews Assocs. v Jeanmarie, 122 Misc 2d 434 , 436-437 [Sup Ct 1983] [same where assignment dependent on lessor “approval”]; see also 29 Williston on Contracts § 74:22: Effect of contract provision prohibiting assignment [4th ed] [surveying anti-assignment cases]). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
University Mews Associates v. Jeanmarie
green
1 sentence2023Co., 39 AD2d 295, 296 , 297-298 [1972] [same where contract required “written consent of the Seller” for assignments]; University Mews Assocs. v Jeanmarie, 122 Misc 2d 434 , 436-437 [Sup Ct 1983] [same where assignment dependent on lessor “approval”]; see also 29 Williston on Contracts § 74:22: Effect of contract provision prohibiting assignment [4th ed] [surveying anti-assignment cases]). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
In Re Marriage of Flory
green
1 sentence2015(See In re Marriage of Triggs, 2011 Wash App LEXIS 1997, *37-38 [Aug. 25, 2011, No. 28489-1-III] [other states reviewing the issue have relied upon 42 USC § 659 (a)—an exception to the anti-assignment clause of the Social Security Act ( 42 USC § 407 [a])] which allows benefits to be garnished for the payment of child support or maintenance obligations—as permitting maintenance awards from federal benefit payments, including Social Security benefits]; Evans v Evans, 111 NC App 792, 798-799, 434 SE2d 856, 860-861 [1993] [concluding that 42 USC § 407 (a) does not bar a maintenance award of Social | 1 | 2015–2015 |
O'Brien v. O'Brien
green
1 sentence1993The revolutionary enactment of the Equitable Distribution Law in 1980 (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B]) recognized that marriage is an "economic partnership” that each spouse has individually contributed to during the marriage (O’Brien v O’Brien, 66 NY2d 576, 583 ; see also, McDermott, supra, at 378-380). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Nicholas Di Menna & Sons, Inc. v. City of New York
green
1 sentence1957To grant summary judgment it must clearly appear that no material and triable issue of fact is presented (Di Menna & Sons v. City of New York, 301 N. Y. 118 ). | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Gillette Bros. v. Aristocrat Restaurant, Inc.
green
1 sentence1957(See Woollard v. Schaffer Stores Co., 272 N. Y. 304, 312-313 ; Gillette Bros. v. Aristocrat Restaurant, 239 N. Y. 87, 89-90 .) Indeed, on facts far stronger than those asserted by plaintiffs, the courts have held, as a matter of law, that there was no waiver of the anti-assignment clause. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Woollard v. Schaffer Stores Co.
green
1 sentence1957(See Woollard v. Schaffer Stores Co., 272 N. Y. 304, 312-313 ; Gillette Bros. v. Aristocrat Restaurant, 239 N. Y. 87, 89-90 .) Indeed, on facts far stronger than those asserted by plaintiffs, the courts have held, as a matter of law, that there was no waiver of the anti-assignment clause. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
State Street Furniture Co. v. Armour & Co.
green
1 sentence1952Furniture Co. v. Armour & Co., 345 Ill. 160 ; Bewick Lbr. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Burck v. Taylor
green
1 sentence1952Special Term dismissed the complaint, holding that the prohibition against assignments “ must be given effect.” The Appellate Division affirmed, one Justice dissenting on the ground that the “ account receivable was assignable by nature, and could not be rendered otherwise without imposing an unlawful restraint upon the power of alienation of property.” ( 278 App. Div. 817 .) Whether an anti-assignment clause is effective is a question that has troubled the courts not only of this State but in other jurisdictions as well (Burck v. Taylor, 152 U. S. 634 ; State St. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Allhusen v. Caristo Construction Corp.
neutral
1 sentence1952Special Term dismissed the complaint, holding that the prohibition against assignments “ must be given effect.” The Appellate Division affirmed, one Justice dissenting on the ground that the “ account receivable was assignable by nature, and could not be rendered otherwise without imposing an unlawful restraint upon the power of alienation of property.” ( 278 App. Div. 817 .) Whether an anti-assignment clause is effective is a question that has troubled the courts not only of this State but in other jurisdictions as well (Burck v. Taylor, 152 U. S. 634 ; State St. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.