Search for: "STATE v. BOARD" Results 181 - 200 of 27,949
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 May 2024, 10:30 pm by Michael Chatzipanagiotis
Ever since, the MC99 provisions have been an integral part of the EU legal order (C-344/04 IATA and ELFAA, para. 36), save for the provisions on cargo, for which competence rests with the EU Member States. [read post]
15 May 2024, 6:32 am by Mary B. McCord
In March, our team at Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection—along with our co-counsel at Law Forward and Stafford Rosenbaum, LLP—settled Penebaker v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 10:15 pm by Ryan Goodman
This includes documents recently disclosed as a result of the settlement of Penebaker v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 Matter of Davis v Schley2024 NY Slip Op 02614Decided on May 10, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 10, 2024Before: Moulton, J.P., Scarpulla, Shulman, Higgitt, O'Neill-Levy, JJ.Index No. 153380/24 Appeal No. 2415 Case No. 2024-02974[*1]In the Matter of… [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 Matter of Davis v Schley2024 NY Slip Op 02614Decided on May 10, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentPublished by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 10, 2024Before: Moulton, J.P., Scarpulla, Shulman, Higgitt, O'Neill-Levy, JJ.Index No. 153380/24 Appeal No. 2415 Case No. 2024-02974[*1]In the Matter of… [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:41 am by Dan Bressler
In most states, a lawyer may share court-awarded fees with a nonprofit organization that employed, retained or recommended the lawyer’s employment. [read post]
13 May 2024, 4:50 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
” The Complaint alleged that Dial is now run by an “unauthorized, illegitimate and illegal board,” who treated Dial “like their personal piggy bank” to “fund their salaries, other perks, and vindictive lawsuits against several of Dial’s former board members,” including against the two plaintiffs. [read post]