⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “Robinson v. New York State Court Division”

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023-02-08 · Published · cited 4× · 213 A.D.3d 786; 183 N.Y.S.3d 154; 2023 NY Slip Op 00683
Robinson v New York City Tr. Auth. (2023 NY Slip Op 00683) Robinson v New York City Tr. Auth. 2023 NY Slip Op 00683 Decided on February 8, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019-12-11 · Published · cited 0× · 2019 NY Slip Op 8881
Robinson v City of New York (2019 NY Slip Op 08881) Robinson v City of New York 2019 NY Slip Op 08881 Decided on December 11, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau p
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019-06-11 · Published · cited 1× · 2019 NY Slip Op 4649
Robinson v City of New York (2019 NY Slip Op 04649) Robinson v City of New York 2019 NY Slip Op 04649 Decided on June 11, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursua
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022-08-10 · Published · cited 10× · 208 A.D.3d 587; 173 N.Y.S.3d 307; 2022 NY Slip Op 04915
Matter of Robinson v City of New York (2022 NY Slip Op 04915) Matter of Robinson v City of New York 2022 NY Slip Op 04915 Decided on August 10, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau purs
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016-10-27 · Published · cited 4× · 2016 NY Slip Op 7083; 143 A.D.3d 641; 40 N.Y.S.3d 381
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank R Ñervo, J.), entered April 21, 2015, which granted defendants the City of New York and State of New York’s motions to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to amend the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. In this action, plaintiffs, individually and as members of a putative class of other similarly situa
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016-04-27 · Published · cited 0× · 138 A.D.3d 1093; 30 N.Y.S.3d 311
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City Housing Authority appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Baynes, J.), dated October 15, 2014, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as alleged that the plaintiff slipped and fell on snow/ice insofar as asserted against it, and as granted the plaintiff’s cros
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016-04-27 · Published · cited 5× · 138 A.D.3d 1093; 30 N.Y.S.3d 311
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City Housing Authority appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Baynes, J.), dated October 15, 2014, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as alleged that the plaintiff slipped and fell on snow/ice insofar as asserted against it, and as granted the plaintiff’s cros
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018-06-28 · Published · cited 0× · 2018 NY Slip Op 4815
Matter of Robinson v New York State Bd. of Parole (2018 NY Slip Op 04815) Matter of Robinson v New York State Bd. of Parole 2018 NY Slip Op 04815 Decided on June 28, 2018 Appellate Division, Third Department Published b
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024-04-18 · Published · cited 0× · 2024 NY Slip Op 02117
Matter of Griffin-Robinson v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision (2024 NY Slip Op 02117) Matter of Griffin-Robinson v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision 2024 NY Slip Op 02117 Decided on April 18, 2024 Appellate Division, Third Depa
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013-02-08 · Published · cited 0×
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 143 CA 12-01440 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, WHALEN, AND MARTOCHE, JJ. LINDA L. ROBINSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHER, ORLEANS MEN’S CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, AND PATRICIA TOWNSEND, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ACADEMIC EDUCATION SUPERVISOR
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017-06-29 · Published · cited 1× · 2017 NY Slip Op 5293; 151 A.D.3d 1515; 57 N.Y.S.3d 741; 2017 WL 2800951
Devine, J. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (O’Connor, J.), entered May 9, 2016 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 632-a, denied Alan Gold’s motion to find Michael Mangan in contempt. Respondent, Kenneth Robinson, was an inmate at Rikers Island in 2005 and, while there, assaulted correction officer Alan Gold. Robin
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020-05-21 · Published · cited 1× · 124 N.Y.S.3d 434; 183 A.D.3d 1160; 2020 NY Slip Op 2960
Matter of Robinson v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. (2020 NY Slip Op 02960) Matter of Robinson v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. 2020 NY Slip Op 02960 Decided on May 21, 2020 Appellate Division, Third Department
New York Court of Appeals · 2001-03-27 · Published · cited 0× · 96 N.Y.2d 775; 725 N.Y.S.2d 633; 749 N.E.2d 202; 2001 N.Y. LEXIS 586
Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no appeal lies as of right from the unanimous judgment of the Appellate Division absent the direct involvement of a substantial constitutional question (see, CPLR 5601).
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000-11-16 · Published · cited 0× · 277 A.D.2d 76; 716 N.Y.S.2d 47; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12002
—Petition of the New York City Department of Correction (DOC), pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Louise Gruner Gans, J.], entered February 22, 2000 [Index No. 404407/98]), seeking to annul a determination of respondent New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) that found it discriminated against Michael Robinson and directed petitioner to pay him $75,000 in compensatory damages, unanimo
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015-03-03 · Published · cited 0× · 126 A.D.3d 437; 2 N.Y.S.3d 785; 2015 NY Slip Op 01767; 2015 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1751
The above-named petitioner having presented an application to this Court praying for an order, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, now, upon reading and filing the papers in said proceeding, and due deliberation having been had thereon, it is unanimously ordered that the application be and the same hereby is denied and the petition dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011-11-10 · Published · cited 0× · 89 A.D.3d 497; 932 N.Y.2d 337
Plaintiff’s cross motion to amend his complaint and bill of particulars to assert a claim under Multiple Dwelling Law § 62 was untimely since the claim is based on a theory not previously advanced and the applicable statute of limitations has expired (see CPLR 203 [f]). The new theory went beyond mere amplification of the pleadings, constituting a new, distinct, and independent theory of liability (Lopez v New York City Hous. Auth., 16 AD3d 164,
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012-04-03 · Published · cited 1× · 94 A.D.3d 428; 941 N.Y.S.2d 123
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Wilma Guzman, J.), entered September 8, 2010, which, after a jury trial, awarded plaintiff a total of $1,003,649, including $268,000 for past pain *429and suffering and $600,000 for future pain and suffering for 40 years, unanimously modified, on the facts, to vacate the awards for past and future pain and suffering and order a new trial solely as to those da
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007-02-06 · Published · cited 2× · 37 A.D.3d 447; 829 N.Y.S.2d 599
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Partnow, J.), dated July 22, 2005, which granted the defendants’ motion, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied. The infa
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005-10-11 · Published · cited 5× · 22 A.D.3d 293; 802 N.Y.S.2d 48
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul A. Victor, J.), entered August 2, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, denied the branch of defendant City of New York’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action and the branch of the same motion seeking summary judgment upon defendant City’s claims for contractual and common-law indemnification as against defendants Gibraltar Waterproofi
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005-05-10 · Published · cited 21× · 18 A.D.3d 255; 794 N.Y.S.2d 378; 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5008
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J), entered December 19, 2003, which denied the motion of defendant Roadway Contracting, Inc. and the respective cross motions of defendants Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and City-Wide Asphalt Faving Co. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, without costs, the motion and cross motions granted, and the complaint dismissed as to these defendants. The C