Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B." Results 3521 - 3540 of 15,301
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2020, 1:49 pm by Michael Froomkin
All this spells e-n b-a-n-c to me. [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 12:43 pm by Mark Ashton
 The assertions were that: (a) the individual defendant was not a “person” within the meaning of Section 1983; (b) the notice to the plaintiffs was adequate and did not interfere with their due process rights; and, (c) the claims had been litigated in state court and were barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Given the continuous nature of Breslin's assignment, the light-duty standard set forth in 2 NYCRR 364.3 (b) was properly applied to petitioners' application for disability retirement benefits (see Matter of Pascale v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d at 1680; Matter of Vicks v Hevesi, 45 AD3d at 1038; see also Matter of Lamb v DiNapoli, 128 AD3d at 1321). [read post]
17 Feb 2020, 8:02 am by IncNow
B” does not refer to a subchapter of the Internal Revenue Code, in the way “S” or “C” do. [read post]
16 Feb 2020, 8:37 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 9:52 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Most of the focus was probably on safe harbors b/c players were bigger on both sides: telcos v. big content providers. [read post]
13 Feb 2020, 6:43 pm
  The first focused on the use of leverage against states through pressure from private actors. [read post]