Search for: "New York Central R. Co. v. New York" Results 201 - 220 of 482
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2014, 7:46 am by NBlack
She is also a GigaOM Pro Analyst and is the author of the ABA book Cloud Computing for Lawyers, co-authors the ABA book Social Media for Lawyers: the Next Frontier, and co-authors Criminal Law in New York, a West-Thomson treatise. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 3:12 am by Peter Mahler
Emerson (pictured above) in a case called Federico v Brancato, 2014 NY Slip Op 50902(U) [Sup Ct, Suffolk County June 9, 2014]. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 7:49 am by Gene Quinn
” The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted summary judgment of non-infringement to Acushnet. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 9:01 pm by Rodger Citron
The trial court agreed and declared the regulation invalid, primarily on the ground that the Board of Health exceeded its authority and violated the separation of powers doctrine as set out by the New York Court of Appeals in Boreali v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 5:54 pm
Glenn Greenwald has a new book out about Edward Snowden, and Michael Kinsley has a review of it in the New York Times. [read post]
23 May 2014, 11:37 am by The Book Review Editor
Portillo was the protegé of Efráin Ríos Montt, the retired general and former dictator who in 2013 would be briefly convicted of genocide. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 3:04 am by Peter Mahler
In Manhattan and other parts of New York City there are many small co-op properties, including converted walk-up tenements and industrial loft buildings, with as few as four, five or six units where each tenant-shareholder may have a seat on the co-op’s board of directors and material voting power, thereby melding into one the theoretically distinct realms of director and shareholder authority and likewise conflating common and individual concerns. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
The Eastern District Court of New York did not delve too deeply into the question of causation, but it did conclude that “Regardless of the precise role played by defendants’ employees, the above-described operation of the Make-A-Tapes clearly evidences their commercial exploitation by defendants for profit in derogation of plaintiffs’ rights of exclusive publication. [read post]