Matter of Julien v. Arthur
The Second Department sanctioned a pro se litigant for filing an appellate brief with fabricated AI-generated legal citations, holding that unverified use of generative AI constitutes frivolous conduct.
The Second Department sanctioned a pro se litigant for filing an appellate brief with fabricated AI-generated legal citations, holding that unverified use of generative AI constitutes frivolous conduct.
The Second Department affirmed a child support order imputing income based on prior tax returns, finding the father failed to submit competent medical evidence of inability to work.
The Second Department annulled a DOH denial of a Convaid Cruiser stroller for a man with quadriplegic cerebral palsy, finding the denial of the durable medical equipment was not supported by substantial evidence.
The Second Department affirmed denial of area variances for a single-family residence, finding the ZBA’s application of the five-factor balancing test was rational.
The Second Department reversed summary judgment in a contested probate proceeding, finding triable issues of undue influence where an attorney-beneficiary held a power of attorney and was involved in will preparation during the decedent’s terminal illness.
The Second Department affirmed approval of a DISH Wireless antenna facility permit, holding that health-based RF emission objections are preempted by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
The Second Department affirmed a finding of derivative neglect, holding that res judicata did not bar the proceeding where prior allegations were dismissed because they were not pleaded rather than on the merits.
The Second Department vacated a Supreme Court order dismissing an Article 78 proceeding naming a Justice as respondent, holding the proceeding should have been commenced in the Appellate Division.
The Second Department vacated a $500,000 default judgment, finding the plaintiff failed to establish a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d) at the damages inquest.
The Second Department reversed summary judgment for State Farm, finding triable issues as to whether the insurer paid the ‘prevailing competitive price’ for auto repairs under 11 NYCRR 216.7.