Search for: "State v. Goldfarb"
Results 1 - 20
of 91
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2024, 3:54 am
Ullmann-Schneider v Lacher & Lovell-Taylor, P.C., 121 AD3d 415, 416 [1st Dept 2014]; Goldfarb v Hoffman, 139 AD3d 474, 475 [1st Dept 2016]; Cascardo v Dratel, 171 AD3d 561, 562 [1st Dept 2019]; see CPLR 3211 [a] [1], [7]). [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 9:22 am
In Gerzog v. [read post]
21 Dec 2022, 6:22 am
Ullmann-Schneider v Lacher & Lovell-Taylor, P.C., 121 AD3d 415, 416 [1st Dept 2014]; Goldfarb v Hoffman, 139 AD3d 474, 475 [1st Dept 2016]; Cascardo v Dratel, 171 AD3d 561, 562 [1st Dept 2019]; see CPLR 3211[a][1], [7]). [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 3:27 pm
The case is Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 9:50 am
In United States v Jindal, (ED Tex. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 9:50 am
In United States v Jindal, (ED Tex. [read post]
30 Oct 2021, 9:26 pm
Supreme Court on the Second Amendment to right to bear arms, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
7 Jun 2021, 9:10 am
S. ___, ___ (2017) (slip op., at 9) (quoting United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2021, 12:50 pm
In a recent decision in Goldfarb v. [read post]
15 Mar 2021, 10:31 am
In an important New Jersey employment law decision, the State Supreme Court ruled in the case of Goldfarb v. [read post]
30 Sep 2020, 9:05 pm
After joining the Supreme Court, Justice Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion in United States v. [read post]
19 Sep 2020, 11:14 am
Goldfarb, 430 U.S. 199 (1977)—both cases she argued—provided the basis for her opinion for the Court in United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 7:18 pm
Goldfarb, 430 U.S. 199 (1977)—both cases she argued—provided the basis for her opinion for the Court in United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 6:13 pm
Goldfarb, Duren v. [read post]
31 Aug 2020, 12:44 pm
If you have not yet read United States v. [read post]
6 Jan 2020, 3:59 am
” At The Ginsburg Tapes (podcast), Lauren Moxley analyzes Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s 1976 oral argument in Califano v. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 4:08 am
Furthermore, the complaint does not contain specific allegations that would place the plaintiffs within an exception to the privity requirement (see AG Capital Funding Partners, L.P. v State St. [read post]
31 May 2019, 7:05 am
” At The Daily Beast, Ronald Goldfarb argues that the 1967 case United States v. [read post]
16 May 2019, 4:06 am
Here, even accepting the facts alleged in the complaint as true, the complaint fails to allege the existence of an attorney-client relationship, privity, or a relationship that otherwise closely resembles privity between the plaintiffs and Leavitt (see DeMartino v Golden, 150 AD3d 1200, 1201; Fredriksen v Fredriksen, 30 AD3d at 371-372; Goldfarb v Schwartz, 26 AD3d 462, 463; Rovello v Klein, 304 AD2d at 638-639). [read post]
21 Apr 2019, 5:09 pm
Of course, the Virginia State Bar in Goldfarb was capable of conspiring to violate the antitrust laws and was not protected by state-action immunity. [read post]
