Search for: "State v. York" Results 241 - 260 of 35,740
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Apr 2024, 4:55 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The cause of action was descended from the first Statute of Westminster adopted in England in 1275, incorporated in New York’s earliest common law, and first codified in this State in a 1787 statute that closely tracks the current provision (see Melcher v Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 23 NY3d 10, 14-15 [2014]; Amalfitano, 12 NY3d at 12). [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by Leslie C. Griffin
I remember an earlier cafeteria Catholic, Governor Mario Cuomo of New York. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 8:37 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
INA § 212(a)(6)(A)(i) states that “An alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled . . . is inadmissible”, and the BIA held in Matter of V-X-, 26 I&N Dec. 147 (BIA 2013) , that a grant of asylum is not an “admission” for these purposes, leaving asylees subject to the grounds of inadmissibility (although with the proviso that they cannot be removed unless their asylum status is terminated). [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 8:09 am by Mark Ashton
Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 4:52 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Jones Law Firm, P.C. v J Synergy Green, Inc. 2024 NY Slip Op 31127(U) April 2, 2024Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 653730/2023 Judge: Lyle E. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 4:30 am by Lawrence Solum
Nowhere is this phenomenon more evident than in the Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 1:36 pm by Howard Bashman
” Jack Healy and Kellen Browning of The New York Times report that “Arizona Reinstates 160-Year-Old Abortion Ban; The state’s highest court said the law, moribund for decades under Roe v. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 11:00 am by Karen Tani
Tully (Golieb Fellow, New York University Law) has posted "The Unenumerated Power. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am by admin
In December 1996, Judge Jones issued his decision that excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ proposed testimony on grounds that it failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702.[5] In October 1996, while Judge Jones was studying the record, and writing his opinion in the Hall case, Judge Weinstein, with a judge from the Southern District of New York, and another from New York state trial court, conducted a two-week Rule 702 hearing, in Brooklyn.… [read post]