Search for: "Gaines v. Murphy"
Results 21 - 40
of 172
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jun 2018, 10:39 am
In doing so, he relied heavily the Supreme Court's recent decision in Murphy v. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 10:04 am
Busk, and Thole v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 5:37 am
Equal Opportunity Employment Comm'n v. [read post]
21 May 2018, 10:42 am
Murphy Oil USA, Inc.) [read post]
23 Mar 2024, 10:00 am
The court distinguishes Lemmon v. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 9:29 am
Murphy Way to keep Him (new ed.) i. 26 Ma'am, if I was as you, I would not fluster myself about it. 1816 Scott Antiquary III. v. 112 The aged housekeeper was no less flustered and hurried in obeying the numerous..commands of her mistress. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 4:00 am
In upholding Justice Warshawsky's marketability discount ruling in Murphy, the Second Department cited Hall v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 9:47 am
” = = = [1] Murphy v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 9:40 am
Bennis v. [read post]
2 May 2011, 4:00 am
First, did Referee Crespo properly adopt what he dubbed the "Murphy Discount" (I'll explain below) in requiring the deduction of the present value of taxes on built-in capital gains (BIG)? [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 7:05 am
For what gain? [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 5:30 am
The First Department clapped back at the Second Department in Estate of Murphy, v New York City Hous. [read post]
3 May 2023, 9:43 am
The First Department clapped back at the Second Department in Estate of Murphy, v New York City Hous. [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 12:25 pm
(There are some exceptions — most notably Jones Day, which gained notoriety for its work on behalf of Trump.) [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 6:33 am
” The EEOC has appealed that case, captioned EEOC v. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 3:16 pm
Hempstead v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 1:00 am
In the Murphy case, the court deducted the present value of future gains taxes assuming a 19-year holding period. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 10:54 am
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 8:27 am
Disciplinary charges must sufficiently specific so as to permit the accused to prepare his or her defenseWolfe v Kelly, 2010 NY Slip Op 08847, decided on December 2, 2010, Appellate Division, First DepartmentEric Wolfe, a New York City Police Department detective, was served with disciplinary charges alleging that He was guilty of perjury and the confiscation of drugs and money for personal gain involving Wolfe’s “stopping unidentified individuals in unspecified… [read post]
28 Jun 2018, 5:19 am
Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 26, 2018 Less expected, tucked into Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion, was the court’s condemnation of Korematsu v. [read post]
