6 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1984–2018 0 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 v. Blumgreen2 sentences1997The underlying rational is that “ ‘ “[i]n some instances * * * the claim * * * may involve a constitutional question which the courts are reluctant to resolve if the non-constitutional claim is dispositive” ’ ” (Joseph v Ruffo, 101 AD2d 664, 666 , affd 64 NY2d 980 , quoting Matter of Johnson v Blum, 58 NY2d 454, 458, n 2 ). 1984The trial court must consider the actual results plaintiff obtained in setting counsel fees, particularly when, as here, plaintiff is deemed “prevailing” even though he succeeded on only some of his claims for relief. 11 Next, the Court of Appeals in Matter of Johnson v Blum ( 58 NY2d 454,458, n 2 , supra) cited a footnote to the House Congressional Report (HR No. 1558, 94th Cong, 2d Sess, p 4, n 7) pertaining to section 1988 which, in pertinent part, states: “In some instances * * * the claim with fees may involve a constitutional question which the courts are reluctant to resolve if the non- | 2 | 2 |
People v. Crimminsgreen2 sentences2018Under the non-constitutional standard, we ask whether proof of guilt was overwhelming, and whether there was no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted had the proscribed evidence not been introduced ( see People v. Kello, 96 N.Y.2d 740 , 744, 723 N.Y.S.2d 111 , 746 N.E.2d 166 [2001] ; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230 , 231, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213 , 326 N.E.2d 787 [1975] ). 2018Under the non-constitutional standard, we ask whether proof of guilt was overwhelming, and whether there was no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted had the proscribed evidence not been introduced ( see People v. Kello, 96 N.Y.2d 740 , 744, 723 N.Y.S.2d 111 , 746 N.E.2d 166 [2001] ; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230 , 231, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213 , 326 N.E.2d 787 [1975] ). | 1 | 4 |
People v. Kellogreen2 sentences2018Under the non-constitutional standard, we ask whether proof of guilt was overwhelming, and whether there was no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted had the proscribed evidence not been introduced ( see People v. Kello, 96 N.Y.2d 740 , 744, 723 N.Y.S.2d 111 , 746 N.E.2d 166 [2001] ; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230 , 231, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213 , 326 N.E.2d 787 [1975] ). 2018Under the non-constitutional standard, we ask whether proof of guilt was overwhelming, and whether there was no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted had the proscribed evidence not been introduced ( see People v. Kello, 96 N.Y.2d 740 , 744, 723 N.Y.S.2d 111 , 746 N.E.2d 166 [2001] ; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230 , 231, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213 , 326 N.E.2d 787 [1975] ). | 1 | 2 |
People v. Rodriguezgreen2 sentences1986While the Family Court should not have considered the appellant’s failure to call an eyewitness who was not in the appellant’s control (see, People v Rodriguez, 38 NY2d 95, 98 ), inasmuch as the appellant testified on his own behalf, any inference that the Family Court may have made was a non-constitutional error (see, People v Rodriguez, supra, at p 99). 1986While the Family Court should not have considered the appellant’s failure to call an eyewitness who was not in the appellant’s control (see, People v Rodriguez, 38 NY2d 95, 98 ), inasmuch as the appellant testified on his own behalf, any inference that the Family Court may have made was a non-constitutional error (see, People v Rodriguez, supra, at p 99). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thomasel v. Perales
green
1 sentence1997Reviewing the first prong of the Gibbs test, which requires that the allegation have “substance sufficient to confer subject matter jurisdiction” (Matter of Johnson v Blum, supra, at 458, n 2), we find that both the facts and the verdict support the allegation that this claim was not “ ‘wholly insubstantial’, ‘obviously frivolous’ or ‘obviously without merit’ ” (Matter of Thomasel v Perales, 78 NY2d 561, 569 , quoting Hagens v Lavine, 415 US 528, 537-538 ). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Joseph v. Ruffo
green
1 sentence1997The underlying rational is that “ ‘ “[i]n some instances * * * the claim * * * may involve a constitutional question which the courts are reluctant to resolve if the non-constitutional claim is dispositive” ’ ” (Joseph v Ruffo, 101 AD2d 664, 666 , affd 64 NY2d 980 , quoting Matter of Johnson v Blum, 58 NY2d 454, 458, n 2 ). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Hagans v. Lavine
green
1 sentence1997Reviewing the first prong of the Gibbs test, which requires that the allegation have “substance sufficient to confer subject matter jurisdiction” (Matter of Johnson v Blum, supra, at 458, n 2), we find that both the facts and the verdict support the allegation that this claim was not “ ‘wholly insubstantial’, ‘obviously frivolous’ or ‘obviously without merit’ ” (Matter of Thomasel v Perales, 78 NY2d 561, 569 , quoting Hagens v Lavine, 415 US 528, 537-538 ). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Joseph v. Ruffo
green
1 sentence1997The underlying rational is that “ ‘ “[i]n some instances * * * the claim * * * may involve a constitutional question which the courts are reluctant to resolve if the non-constitutional claim is dispositive” ’ ” (Joseph v Ruffo, 101 AD2d 664, 666 , affd 64 NY2d 980 , quoting Matter of Johnson v Blum, 58 NY2d 454, 458, n 2 ). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
In re Dennis N.
green
1 sentence1986Under the facts of this case, we find no reason to disturb the Family Court’s findings with respect to credibility (see, People v Carter, 63 NY2d 530, 539 ; Matter of Dennis N., 110 AD2d 703 ; People v Gruttola, 43 NY2d 116, 122 ) and since the evidence of appellant’s culpability was overwhelming, any error was harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242 ). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
People v. Gruttola
green
1 sentence1986Under the facts of this case, we find no reason to disturb the Family Court’s findings with respect to credibility (see, People v Carter, 63 NY2d 530, 539 ; Matter of Dennis N., 110 AD2d 703 ; People v Gruttola, 43 NY2d 116, 122 ) and since the evidence of appellant’s culpability was overwhelming, any error was harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242 ). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
People v. Carter
green
1 sentence1986Under the facts of this case, we find no reason to disturb the Family Court’s findings with respect to credibility (see, People v Carter, 63 NY2d 530, 539 ; Matter of Dennis N., 110 AD2d 703 ; People v Gruttola, 43 NY2d 116, 122 ) and since the evidence of appellant’s culpability was overwhelming, any error was harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242 ). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs
red
1 sentence1984In such cases, if the constitutional claim for which fees may be awarded meets the 2-pronged Gibbs test, attorney fees may be allowed even if the court doesn’t decide the constitutional question.” In this case, the two-pronged Gibbs test (see Mine Workers v Gibbs, 383 US 715, 725 ) was satisfied since the constitutional claims plaintiff raised were meritorious and derived from the same common facts as the statutory claim. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.