Search for: "TOWNING v. STATE"
Results 2861 - 2880
of 5,891
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Nov 2016, 12:23 pm
That is a significant change in the law because the Supreme Judicial Court held in the 2012 case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 12:23 pm
That is a significant change in the law because the Supreme Judicial Court held in the 2012 case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 3:30 am
If your deed is incorrect, you cannot simply get the “town clerk” to “fix the language”. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 6:02 am
Madden v. [read post]
23 Aug 2007, 11:22 am
Small town, so not a lot of dentist options. [read post]
25 Sep 2007, 6:36 am
Fifty years ago, the Brown v. [read post]
20 May 2024, 6:00 am
This provision, and not Civil Service Law § 72, applies under the circumstances because a more general statute generally must yield to a more specific statute (Matter of Zelazny Family Enters., LLC v Town of Shelby, 180 AD3d 45, 48 [4th Dept 2019]; McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 397). [read post]
20 May 2024, 6:00 am
This provision, and not Civil Service Law § 72, applies under the circumstances because a more general statute generally must yield to a more specific statute (Matter of Zelazny Family Enters., LLC v Town of Shelby, 180 AD3d 45, 48 [4th Dept 2019]; McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 397). [read post]
13 Jul 2018, 3:45 pm
United States and Hirabayashi v. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 3:00 am
Anastasia Klupchak v. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 9:17 am
Additionally, Friends of the Eel River introduces more legal complications for the planned $64 billion bullet train between Los Angeles and San Francisco, as it appears to require compliance with CEQA and makes the project vulnerable to additional litigation. [1] See Town of Atherton v. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 9:17 am
Additionally, Friends of the Eel River introduces more legal complications for the planned $64 billion bullet train between Los Angeles and San Francisco, as it appears to require compliance with CEQA and makes the project vulnerable to additional litigation. [1] See Town of Atherton v. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 4:07 am
Walsh, et al.; SEC v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 7:45 am
There are records of such courts in Pennsylvania (Emerick v. [read post]
15 Feb 2017, 9:22 am
*For example, the Court has previously ruled that a website that operated like an electronic "town green" to which third parties could contribute content qualified as petitioning activity inMacdonald v. [read post]
15 Feb 2017, 9:22 am
*For example, the Court has previously ruled that a website that operated like an electronic "town green" to which third parties could contribute content qualified as petitioning activity in Macdonald v. [read post]
15 Feb 2017, 9:22 am
*For example, the Court has previously ruled that a website that operated like an electronic "town green" to which third parties could contribute content qualified as petitioning activity in Macdonald v. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 6:02 am
Madden v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 10:17 pm
First, in United States v. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 12:24 pm
The memorandum opinion was rendered by the Honorable Al Scoggins, a fomer district judge in my home town of Waxahachie, Texas. [read post]
