Search for: "Sees v. Sees" Results 3281 - 3300 of 121,936
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Jan 2024, 8:09 am by Kurt Lash
Akhil Reed Amar (Yale) and Vikram David Amar (Illinois) in Trump v. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 6:02 am by Alessandro Cerri
 Further, the Court noted that the average consumer shopping in Aldi, who is reasonably well informed and observant, would know that Aldi also sells third party brands in its stores, and would not be surprised to see something which they perceived or mistook to be Thatchers' Product. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
* See Matter of DeFazio v DiNapoli, 211 AD3d 1254, and Matter of Frederick v New York State Comptroller, 204 AD3d 1292.** See Matter of Pirrone v Town of Wallkill, 6 AD3d 447, in which the Appellate Division addressed the recommendation of a hearing officer's finding that the individual was required to undergo spinal fusion surgery or forfeit General Municipal Law §207-c disability retirement benefits. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
* See Matter of DeFazio v DiNapoli, 211 AD3d 1254, and Matter of Frederick v New York State Comptroller, 204 AD3d 1292.** See Matter of Pirrone v Town of Wallkill, 6 AD3d 447, in which the Appellate Division addressed the recommendation of a hearing officer's finding that the individual was required to undergo spinal fusion surgery or forfeit General Municipal Law §207-c disability retirement benefits. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 4:46 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
More than a dozen years ago, Peter Mahler wrote about one such case, Barasch v Williams Real Estate Co. (33 Misc 3d 1219[A] [Sup Ct, NY County 2011]). [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 3:45 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Here, the plaintiff failed to establish that the law firm defendants had an obligation to preserve the case file from the personal injury action or that it was destroyed with a culpable state of mind (see Tanner v Bethpage Union Free Sch. [read post]
28 Jan 2024, 4:46 am by Etienne Farnoux
The Example of X v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2021] EWHC 355 (Fam)) To illustrate the argument, I choose a UK case that enters into a direct dialogue with Susanne Gössl’s reflection about the notion of habitual residence (see post (2)). [read post]
28 Jan 2024, 12:15 am by Frank Cranmer
Presumably, Mrs Higgs is appealing against that disposal – but we’ll see. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 8:27 am by Eric Goldman
For more on the proper economic accounting of attention consumption, see this paper. [read post]