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.
6 New York opinions name it 2 courts 1940–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Miccio v. National Surety Corp.
green
2 sentences2013Corp., 170 AD2d at 938 ; Acorn Ponds v Hartford Ins. 2013Corp., 170 AD2d at 938 ; Acorn Ponds v Hartford Ins. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Van Wie Chevrolet, Inc. v. General Motors, LLC
green
1 sentence2017However, permitting the plaintiff to challenge the addition of the Westbury dealership under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 463 (2) (ff) would essentially render the standing requirement and specific procedures set forth in Vehicle and Traffic Law § 463 (2) (cc) superfluous (see Van Wie Chevrolet, Inc. v General Motors, LLC, 145 AD3d at 8-9 ). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Robinson v. Jewish Hospital & Medical Center
green
1 sentence2000Aviation, 275 AD2d 362 [decided herewith]; see also, A to Z Applique Die Cutting v 319 McKibbin St. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Melcher v. . Ocean Accident Guarantee Corp.
neutral
1 sentence1955Corp., 226 N. Y. 51 .) The plaintiff seeks to bar defendant’s plea of late notice because under rule 92 of the Rules of Civil Practice defendant’s denial of due performance by plaintiff was in general terms. | 1 | 1955–1955 |
James v. Alderton Dock Yards, Ltd.
green
1 sentence1940It is equally plain that no such immunity can be afforded by means of a declaratory judgment, for even though it be assumed that the defendant is under a statutory duty to enforce its fair trade agreements and that it has, by failing to discharge that duty, abandoned its rights under the agreements, nevertheless price cutting by the plaintiff would remain actionable “ at the suit of any person damaged thereby,” including competing retailers. “ The general purpose of the declaratory judgment is to serve some practical end in quieting or stabilizing an uncertain or disputed jural relation either | 1 | 1940–1940 |
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.