Search for: "Shah v. Shah"
Results 181 - 200
of 604
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Oct 2019, 4:40 am
“If the defendant meets this initial burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to raise a question of fact as to whether the statute of limitations has been tolled, an exception to the limitations period is applicable, or the plaintiff actually commenced the action within the applicable limitations period” (Amrusi v Nwaukoni, 155 AD3d 814, 816 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Shah v Exxis, Inc., 138 AD3d 970, 971 [2016]). [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 4:33 am
“On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, the court must accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true, accord the plaintiff the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory” (Shah v Exxis, Inc., 138 AD3d 970, 971 [2016]; see Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. [read post]
4 Sep 2019, 9:09 am
Dickinson v. [read post]
21 Aug 2019, 4:31 am
“If the defendant meets this initial burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to raise a question of fact as to whether the statute of limitations has been tolled, an exception to the limitations period is applicable, or the plaintiff actually commenced the action within the applicable limitations period” (Amrusi v Nwaukoni, 155 AD3d 814, 816 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Shah v Exxis, Inc., 138 AD3d 970, 971 [2016]). [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 10:55 am
In Haidak v. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 8:10 am
In 2017, the Indian Supreme Court, in the case State Bank of India v Santosh Gupta, observed that even though Article 370 was labeled a “[t]emporary provision[]” and the Constituent Assembly had dissolved, the article “continue[s] to be in force” (¶12)—thus indicating it had attained permanent status. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 12:55 pm
In Haidak v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 4:33 pm
Devina Shah is an Associate in CMS’ Commercial Litigation and Arbitration Group. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 7:13 am
Devina Shah is an Associate in CMS’ Commercial Litigation and Arbitration Group. [read post]
4 Aug 2019, 3:15 am
UK court finds content aggregators hurt creators interests, Wheat v Google LLC & Anor [2019] EWHC 1518 (Ch) (21 May… https://t.co/46aWYHZd7V 2019-07-28 UK court finds jurisdiction over Google, Wheat v Google LLC & Anor [2019] EWHC 1518 (Ch) (21 May 2019) https://t.co/ATcbEgWfuq 2019-07-28 Standard terms including exclusion of liability in hyperlink enforced in Scottish case https://t.co/h5WFqwc5YT 2019-07-29 Opinion | Are We Finally Getting Serious About Big Tech… [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
28 Jul 2019, 4:05 pm
India Firstpost had an article “Supreme Court to hear The Wire’s plea on 27 August in criminal defamation case filed against it by Jay Shah”. [read post]
25 Jul 2019, 9:02 am
From People v. [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
13 Jul 2019, 7:04 am
Paras Shah analyzed a U.N. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
24 Jun 2019, 1:00 am
Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah, heard 7 May 2019. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 6:42 am
Shah and Daniel F. [read post]
