Search for: "State v Condon" Results 221 - 240 of 970
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Nov 2019, 4:27 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In [*2]addition, a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, in itself, does not give rise to a private cause of action against an attorney or law firm (see Cohen v Kachroo, 115 AD3d 512, 513; DeStaso v Condon Resnick, LLP, 90 AD3d 809, 814; Kallman v Krupnick, 67 AD3d 1093, 1096; Weintraub v Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin, Krim, & Ballon, 172 AD2d 254, 254). [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 11:49 am
There are others where non- compliance may be condoned or dispensed with. [read post]
25 May 2015, 9:22 am by Ben
Defendants to the action include Miramax studio, film distributor Roadside Attractions, and director Bill Condon, who previously directed "Chicago" and "Dreamgirls". [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 4:21 pm by INFORRM
On 4 November 2019 Warby J gave judgment in the case of Lord Sheikh v Associated Newspapers [2019] EWHC 2947 (QB) finding that a MailOnline article made a defamatory allegation against the the claimant, a Conservative Member of the House of Lords. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 12:30 am by Adam Wagner
HJ (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 31 (07 July 2010) - Read Judgment The Supreme Court has ruled that the government’s “Anne Frank” policy of sending back gay refugees to their home countries where they feared persecution is unlawful as it breached their human rights.. [read post]
1 Mar 2015, 2:15 pm
Accordingly, the Court concluded that its holding in Public Adm'r of Bronx County v Equitable Life Assur. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 3:50 am
The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2008/2008_07887.htm See, also, MTA Bus Co. v Transport Workers Union of Am., AFL-CIO, 55 AD3d 695, decided the same by the Appellate Division, Second Department concerning the same issue. [read post]
30 Jul 2014, 7:33 am by Jeff Welty
”), and (2) that under the state constitution, there is no good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, State v. [read post]