Search for: "Bui v. Parks" Results 121 - 140 of 793
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Feb 2021, 4:46 am by Peter Mahler
Three weeks ago, I wrote about the Bak v Rostek case in Brooklyn Supreme Court addressing the duty to disclose third-party offers amidst buy-out negotiations between co-owners. [read post]
25 Jan 2021, 5:47 pm by Richard Hunt
Johnson argued that he meant to include other nearby businesses in the same business park, but the Court wasn’t buying. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 11:56 am by Phil Dixon
(1) Despite the State’s repeated use of “moped” to describe the defendant’s vehicle, sufficient evidence existed to establish that the defendant’s vehicle met the statutory definition of “motor vehicle”; (2) New trial required where trial court plainly erred in failing to instruct the jury on the definition of “motor vehicle” State v. [read post]
13 Dec 2020, 4:48 pm by INFORRM
IPSO has published a number of rulings and resolutions statements since our last Round Up: 28060-20 Sturt v Mail Online, 1 Accuracy (2019), Resolved – IPSO mediation 27845-20 Garrity v The Scotsman, 1 Accuracy (2019), Resolved – IPSO mediation 27809-20 Levick v The National, 1 Accuracy (2019), Resolved – IPSO mediation 15320-20 Cook v Daily Express, 1 Accuracy (2019), 12 Discrimination (2019), No breach – after investigation 12005-20 Oliver… [read post]
22 Nov 2020, 4:01 am by Administrator
Contracts/Condos: “Air Space Parcels”; Parking; Pre & Post‑Incorporation ContractsOwners, Strata Plan LMS 3905 v. [read post]
26 Oct 2020, 11:18 am by Andy Foreman
The offer, usually expressed at least partly in natural language on the face of the vending machine, is a “general invitation to the public to buy [a] beverage,” assuming we’re talking about a soda machine. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 11:34 am by Sam Brunson
The Supreme Court has held that “willful” means “a voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty” (US v. [read post]
7 Jul 2020, 9:29 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
These Opinion Letters extend a trend toward the flexible application of the OSE that accords with the Supreme Court’s analysis in Christopher v. [read post]
If the original packer declines to purchase, then the producer may offer to sell at a different price point, but the second packer is under no obligation to buy. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Campaign Funds for Judges Warp Criminal Justice, Study Finds New York Times – Adam Liptak | Published: 6/1/2020 In Gideon v. [read post]