Search for: "JUSTICE DEPT."
Results 2681 - 2700
of 3,152
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Oct 2008, 8:23 am
Lloyd, 40 AD3d 685, 686 (2d Dept 2007); Fili v. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 11:10 am
"The test of whether a decision is arbitrary or capricious is "determined largely by whether a particular action should have been taken or is justified . . . and whether the administrative action is without foundation in fact.'" (See Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222].Other points made by Justice Feinman:1. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 1:24 am
"Opinion Casts Light on Secretive Justice Dept. [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 7:29 am
TRAC, the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse U., reports that the DOJ has recently created a category to track current federal efforts to criminally prosecute cases of mortgage fraud. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 8:45 pm
Although defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review, we exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see People v Fomby, 42 AD3d 894, 895; People v Valdez, 41 AD3d 1255, lv denied 9 NY3d 882).Last week, in People v Cambridge (2008 NY Slip Op 07435 [10/3/08]) the Court went a step further and corrected such an unpreserved error, in the interest of justice, depsite there being a valid waiver of appeal. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 4:05 am
The Washington Post reports today that "Chinese Detainees' Release Is Blocked; Justice Dept. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 8:59 am
Morgan Guar. and Trust Co. of New York, 223 AD2d 441 [1st Dept. 1996]; where court found that a ten month delay was unreasonable; and see Heydt Contracting Corp. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 5:59 pm
Term 2d Dept. 2007], citations and quotation omitted).The regulation contains, in addition to an economic sanction against recalcitrant insurers, a built-in protection against potential delay by providing that where an applicant chooses not to timely press forward to seek redress for a denial, there will be no interest penalty assessed against the insurer until such time as the applicant chooses a remedy. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 12:38 pm
Bartolo, 271 A.D.2d 267 [1 Dept 2000]).The medallion's leased. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 1:50 am
New York State Supreme Court Justice Rosalyn H. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 12:24 am
The Justice Department's case against Kent Roberts is officially closed. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 7:06 pm
Thus, the dissenting justices reason, the deficiencies int he co-defendant's attack on the credibility of the complainant was less relevant. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 2:00 am
Can you imagine the increase in the US Justice Dept. budget if we did that?? [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 2:30 pm
The Justice Dept. gets a lot of perks from the court. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 1:18 pm
Josh Kunis website - www.ElectJoshKunis2008.com current position - attorney in private practice blog talk radio interview Contribution and Expense Report Doug Smith website - www.dougsmithforjudge.com current position - Justice Court Judge Contribution and Expense Report [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 12:00 pm
Inc., 38 AD3d 440 (1st Dept. 2007). [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 2:59 am
Stewart Jones, whose integrity and commitment to justice is above reproach. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 10:17 pm
In People v Fredrick, 2008 NY Slip Op 06056 [4th Dept 7/3/08] [here] the Fourth Department not only reversed a conviction due to unobjected to prosecutorial misconduct, but in doing so the Court expressly refused to consider whether the misconduct contributed to the verdict. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 9:56 pm
The dissenting Justices, in an opinion by Justice Fahey, strongly disagreed that the trial judge's reasoning constituted an individualized determination:In this case, the court set forth on the record three reasons for the use of the stun belt. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 9:53 pm
In People v Ballerstein 2008 NY Slip Op 05127 [4th Dept 6/6/08], a decision sure to be cited often, the Fourth Department held that, despite not being preserved for review, the cumulative effect of evidentiary errors and prosecutorial misconduct deprived the defendant of his right to a fair trial and required reversal. [read post]
