Search for: "PALMER v. THE STATE" Results 221 - 240 of 665
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Aug 2012, 1:51 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
While most of the underlying causes of action were time-barred before the plaintiff retained the [*2]defendants, the plaintiff's claim under 42 USC § 1983 arising from malicious prosecution was viable at the time the defendants commenced the federal action on the plaintiff's behalf (see Palmer v State of New York, 57 AD3d 364, 364; Pendelton v City of New York, 44 AD3d 733, 737). [read post]
1 Jan 2015, 3:29 pm by Kirk Jenkins
The Court then turned to the question of whether plaintiffs had adequately stated causes of action under Counts IV and V. [read post]
27 Jan 2023, 9:30 pm by ernst
United States, Sarah Friedman on  Hansberry v. [read post]
17 Aug 2007, 2:35 pm
On this latter point, Judge Shedd dissented, concluding that it would be appropriate to remand the case for retrial on punitive damages.The Court in Palmer v. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 2:47 am by Matrix Law
Z o.o. and others v Jakubowski and others, heard 28th February 2023 Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, heard 2nd March 2023 The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilites Water Ltd No 2, heard 6th March 2023 London Borough of Merton Council v Nuffield Health Ltd, heard 7th March 2023 R (on the application of Palmer) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates Court and another, heard… [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 3:22 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The conduct of legal matters routinely "involve[ ] questions of judgment and discretion as to which even the most distinguished members of the profession may differ" (Byrnes v Palmer, 18 App Div 1, 4, affd 160 NY 699). [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 7:00 am by Spencer L. Reames
 This rule has its genesis in the Court of Appeals decision of Riggs v Palmer, in which the Court stated “[n]o one shall be permitted to profit by his own fraud, or to take advantage of his own wrong, or to found any claim upon his own iniquity, or to acquire property by his own crime” (Riggs v Palmer, 115 NY 506, 511 [1889]). [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 10:02 am by Emily Hammond
Indeed, in only a few contexts — such as equal protection and establishment clause cases — has the Supreme Court looked behind neutral statutory text to ascertain an illegitimate purpose, and even then it has been cautious, as in 1971’s Palmer v. [read post]
15 Jan 2018, 5:20 am
 We can now confirm the full agenda and part of the line-up, as follows:14:00-14:30 – Registration14:30-14:40 – Introduction and welcome14:40-15:40 – Panel 1 – “The fragile state of relations between service providers and brand owners: life after the UK Supreme Court decision in Cartier v Sky”Moderator: Eleonora Rosati(University of Southampton and JIPLP Co-Editor)Confirmed Panellists: Catherine Palmer(Legal Director at… [read post]