Search for: "New York Times Co. v. Sullivan"
Results 281 - 300
of 435
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Oct 2012, 5:39 pm
Supreme Court's 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
At the same time, courts recognize that every disciplinary situation is different and are pre-disposed to accord “much deference” to the employer’s determination regarding the penalty to be imposed [Ahsaf v Nyquist, 37 NY2d 182], especially with respect to quasi-military organizations such as a police department or a similar law enforcement agency [Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32].In Gradel v Sullivan Co. [read post]
27 Mar 2016, 2:54 pm
Section V then posits an alternative analysis, normatively autonomous (though not entirely free) of the orbit of the state, a vision possible only when the ideological presumptions of the state are suspended. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 9:18 am
As New York Times v. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 8:45 am
For a solid description of the recent hack of Apple by AntiSec, see The New York Times Bits Blog's "Hackers Claim to Have 12 Million Apple Device Records. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 11:13 am
Likewise, even prohibitions on seditious libel, rejected by this Court in New York Times Co. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2021, 8:07 am
Collins case, a follow-up to New York Times Co. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 11:13 am
Likewise, even prohibitions on seditious libel, rejected by this Court in New York Times Co. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2008, 12:54 am
Judges Split on Former Sullivan & Cromwell Partner's Income in Divorce Case
New York Law Journal
Whether a Sullivan & Cromwell partner-turned-investment-banker earns $330,000 a year, twice as much or 10 times as much has divided a New York court reviewing the maintenance and child-support arrangements of his divorce. [read post]
10 Jan 2008, 12:15 am
And there is some talk that the firm is in merger discussions again, this time with a firm with New York ties. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 9:07 am
The court applied the familiar "gist" or "sting" doctrine, saying that misquotes are only "false" for defamation purposes if they materially change the meaning of the quote: We conclude that a deliberate alteration of the words uttered by a plaintiff does not equate with knowledge of falsity for purposes of New York Times Co. v. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 1:04 pm
Co. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 11:17 am
New York Times Co. v. [read post]
15 Oct 2022, 5:05 am
In New York Times v. [read post]
11 Jan 2021, 2:56 am
Research and Resources Rescuing Our Democracy by Rethinking New York Times Co. v. [read post]
21 Dec 2016, 10:43 am
New York Times v. [read post]
7 Mar 2023, 2:33 pm
NBC News's piece ends with this: "Ron Kuby, a First Amendment lawyer in New York, said the law would not survive a court challenge if it is passed. [read post]
27 Jul 2020, 11:54 am
Co. v. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 4:29 am
Zimmer, Inc., 927 F.2d 124, 129 (2d Cir. 1991) (applying New York law); Phelps v. [read post]
24 May 2013, 10:46 am
For example, in Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. [read post]
