Legal Opinion

Roberto Ramos v. SimplexGrinnell LP

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 23, 2014No. 160PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Smith, J.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has asked us what deference a court should pay to an agency’s decision, made for its own enforcement purposes, to construe a statute prospectively only. The agency in question, the New York State Department of Labor, has submitted an amicus brief to us in which it renounces any claim to deference in this litigation. This leads us to give a narrow answer to the Second Circuit’s question: We will not give the agency more deference than it claims for itself.

I

In this lawsuit, the federal courts have been called…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ramos v. SIMPLEXGRINNELL LPDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2011
  2. Golden v. JosephNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  3. Pinkwater v. JosephNew York Court of Appeals · 1950
  4. Ramos v. SimplexGrinnell LPCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ramos v. SimplexGrinnell LPCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
  2. Walton v. Comfort Sys. USA (Syracuse), Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2026
  3. Glenn Jackson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Britannica Floor Covering, Inc., and Michael KahoudDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2026
  4. Maddison v. Comfort Systems USA (Syracuse), Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 2020
  5. Walton v. Comfort SystemsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API