COMMERCIAL LAW, CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW, HEALTH LAW
New York v. Smokes-Spirits.com, Inc., No. 92
The Court of Appeals answered the following certified questions from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the negative: 1) Does New York City have standing to assert its claims under General Business Law section 349?; and 2) may the City assert a common law public nuisance claim that is predicated on N.Y. Public Health Law section 1399-ll?
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, FAMILY LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW, JUVENILE LAW
Anonymous v. Rochester, No. 81
In an action claiming that the juvenile nighttime curfew adopted by the City of Rochester is unconstitutional, the dismissal of the complaint is reversed, where the curfew violated the substantive due process rights of minors to enjoy freedom of movement and of parents to control the upbringing of their children.
CONSTRUCTION, INJURY AND TORT LAW
Cunha v. New York, No. 91
In a personal injury action based on injuries sustained by Plaintiff while working at a roadway excavation, judgment for Plaintiff is reversed where, because New York City was only vicariously liable for violating the provisions of the Labor Law at issue, it was entitled to full common-law indemnification from its codefendant, the party actually responsible for the incident.
CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE
People v. Decker, No. 102
Defendant’s murder conviction is affirmed where: 1) although there had been a 15-year delay in re-indicting Defendant after the charges were initially dropped, the delay was justified by the witnesses’ fear of testifying against Defendant; and 2) Defendant was not prejudiced by the delay.
CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, SENTENCING
People v. Mingo, No. 94
Defendant’s rape sentence is vacated where, with the proper foundation, internal documents generated by the District Attorney’s office may support a risk level adjudication, but the trial court failed to require such a foundation, and thus the sentencing enhancement applied by the trial court was in error.
INJURY AND TORT LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE
Petrone v. Fernandez, No. 100
In an action claiming that a dog at Defendant apartment complex owner’s property injured Plaintiff, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed, where Defendant did not own the dog and had no reason to know of the dog’s vicious propensities.