Search for: "State of New York et al" Results 2581 - 2600 of 3,244
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Aug 2010, 1:07 pm by James R. Marsh
A town of about 40,000 people, it is the county seat for Luzerne, in the northeast part of the state. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 8:51 am by Patti Spencer
Finmann, et al., Respondents, New York Court of Appeals Opinion No. 104 (June 17, 2010), 2010 NY Slip Op 5281. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 11:05 am by Kevin Sheerin
Paul Zuckerberg, et al. v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, the plaintiffs sought to recover damages for personal injuries. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 11:34 pm by Larry Downes
If the size of my stacks are any indication of activity level, the most contentious areas of legal debate are, not surprisingly, privacy (Facebook, Google, Twitter et. al.), infrastructure (Net neutrality, Title II and the wireless spectrum crisis), copyright (the secret ACTA treaty, Limewire, Google v. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 3:58 pm
District Court for the Southern District of New York from 1987 to 2006). [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 2:10 am by Kelly
Here is Think IP Strategy’s weekly selection of top Online intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 3:18 am
Supreme Court dismissed the petition insofar as it purportedly was asserted against the New York State Department of Education and denied the petition insofar as asserted against Ronald DePace, confirmed the Hearing Officer's determination. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 9:40 am by Pilar G. Kraman
The Research Foundation of State University of New York, et al. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 2:59 am
  Judge Cardozo's ruling only directly impacted New York law, but other states followed. [read post]
11 Jul 2010, 6:04 am by GGCSMB&R
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, et al., The First Department held that a Gradall Forklift was a mobile crane within the meaning of the Industrial Code, 12 NYCRR 23-8.2 stating; "The court correctly held, based on the evidence adduced at the framed-issue hearing, that the subject equipment was a mobile crane for purposes of the Industrial Code regulations governing the safe operation of mobile cranes, considering the manner in which the equipment was being… [read post]