april 15, 2008 - Criminal Law Library Blog

More documents

Recommendations

Info

activities were restricted (see Uddin v Cooper, 32 AD3d 270 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 808 [2007]). Although her attendance may have been irregular, plaintiff was able to return to school within 10 days of the accident. We find that the jury verdict is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Rivera v 4064 Realty Co., 17 AD3d 201, 203 [2005]). We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT. ENTERED: APRIL <strong>15</strong>, <strong>2008</strong> _______________________ CLERK 2
Lippman, P.J., Tom, Williams, Acosta, JJ. 3390 The People of the State of New York, Ind. 443/06 Respondent, -against- Windell Harris, Defendant-Appellant. _________________________ Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Seon Jeong Lee of counsel), for appellant. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Sheila O'Shea of counsel), for respondent. _________________________ Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered on or about January 31, 2007, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Order filed. 3
Page 1: SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION F
Page 5 and 6: Danann Realty Corp. v Harris, 5 NY2
Page 7 and 8: Circle Rubbish launched “a force
Page 9 and 10: classes, and scheduling visits with
Page 11 and 12: Lippman, P.J., Tom, Williams, Acost
Page 13 and 14: was cut too deep. Defendants’ the
Page 21 and 22: witnesses and collective tailoring
Page 23 and 24: stipulated to the grounds, and the
Page 29 and 30: Mullaney v Wilbur, 421 US 684 [1975
Page 33 and 34: liability claims “share few, if a
Page 35 and 36: ecords of drug transactions and def
Page 37 and 38: argument that this testimony invade
Page 39 and 40: in the 12 hours prior to plaintiff
Page 41 and 42: individual as the sole tenant in th
Page 43 and 44: opposed the motion, and pending the
Page 45 and 46: that defendant’s vehicle was regi
Page 47 and 48: arrests respectively. In fact, one
Page 49 and 50: inmate-victim who vaguely claimed t
Page 51 and 52: CATTERSON, J. (dissenting) Because
Page 53 and 54:
person that’s in the cell closest
Page 55 and 56:
evidence that anyone had intimidate
Page 57 and 58:
him. See People v. Harte, 29 A.D.3d
Page 59 and 60:
summary judgment on his Labor Law
Page 61 and 62:
aise a triable issue as to construc
Page 63 and 64:
specific substance of the conversat
Page 65 and 66:
Gonzalez, J.P., Williams, Catterson
Page 67 and 68:
Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman
Page 69 and 70:
interest of justice. As an alternat
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
leave to amend the complaint to ass
Page 79 and 80:
in the first degree. After being de
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
decline to review it in the interes
Page 85 and 86:
panelist understood that he needed
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
to be compensated for its services
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Lippman, P.J., Saxe, Nardelli, Will
Page 101 and 102:
Lippman, P.J., Tom, Mazzarelli, And
Page 103 and 104:
Tom, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Gonza
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Gonzalez, J.P., Nardelli, Buckley,
Page 109:
The Following Orders Were Entered A
show all

april 15, 2008 - Criminal Law Library Blog

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?