Search for: "TOWNING v. STATE" Results 2741 - 2760 of 5,891
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2021, 3:15 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Thus, although plaintiff raised questions of fact as to the defense, she failed to conclusively establish that the continuous representation doctrine tolled the statute of limitations (see Red Zone LLC v Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, 27 NY3d at 1050; Town of Amherst v Weiss, 120 AD3d 1550, 1552-1553 [2014]; Deep v Boies, 53 AD3d at 952; Gravel v Cicola, 297 AD2d 620, 621 [2002]). [read post]
19 May 2010, 2:11 pm by Mark Bennett
Haynes thinks, and Judge Johnson agrees (at least until she reads U.S. v. [read post]
22 May 2012, 1:00 pm by Richard Gallogly
The Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) today issued a decision in Regis College v. [read post]
10 Oct 2007, 7:00 pm
In Nichols v City of Taft, the Fifth District Court of Appeal holds that the use of a fee multiplier to compensate for the higher hourly rates of out-of-town counsel requires a sufficient showing -- which the Nichols failed to make -- that hiring local counsel was "impracticable. [read post]
10 Mar 2014, 9:13 am
Briggs repaid them the amounts stated in the discovery response. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 10:08 am by Christopher Sagers
  That is, those deviations must either be sovereign acts of the states themselves, or comply with the Midcal and Town of Hallie standards. [read post]
8 Jan 2009, 12:16 am
FellerNASSAU COUNTYBusiness LawForeign Corporation Not 'Mere' Out-of-State Distributor, Business Activities Not 'Occasional'Schwarz Supply Source v. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 10:59 am by Abbott & Kindermann
Resources Code, § 21050 et seq.) to a state agency’s proprietary acts with respect to a state-owned and funded rail line or is CEQA not preempted in such circumstances under the market participant doctrine (see Town of Atherton v. [read post]