Search for: "Herring v. Hooper"
Results 21 - 40
of 104
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Aug 2012, 6:43 am
Hooper, after the Supreme Court denied his final request for a stay. [read post]
11 Jun 2021, 4:00 am
" Citing Hooper Assoc. v AGS Computers, 74 N.Y.2d 487, the Appellate Division noted that the language of the Employer's internal resolution was ambiguous, and opined that "This ambiguity itself precludes a finding of entitlement to contractual indemnification" as [1] the resolution does not convey a clear right to indemnification and [2] Plaintiff was ordered to pay restitution in connection with a guilty plea to disorderly conduct in satisfaction of an… [read post]
11 Jun 2021, 4:00 am
" Citing Hooper Assoc. v AGS Computers, 74 N.Y.2d 487, the Appellate Division noted that the language of the Employer's internal resolution was ambiguous, and opined that "This ambiguity itself precludes a finding of entitlement to contractual indemnification" as [1] the resolution does not convey a clear right to indemnification and [2] Plaintiff was ordered to pay restitution in connection with a guilty plea to disorderly conduct in satisfaction of an… [read post]
11 Jun 2021, 4:00 am
" Citing Hooper Assoc. v AGS Computers, 74 N.Y.2d 487, the Appellate Division noted that the language of the Employer's internal resolution was ambiguous, and opined that "This ambiguity itself precludes a finding of entitlement to contractual indemnification" as [1] the resolution does not convey a clear right to indemnification and [2] Plaintiff was ordered to pay restitution in connection with a guilty plea to disorderly conduct in satisfaction of an… [read post]
11 Jun 2021, 4:00 am
" Citing Hooper Assoc. v AGS Computers, 74 N.Y.2d 487, the Appellate Division noted that the language of the Employer's internal resolution was ambiguous, and opined that "This ambiguity itself precludes a finding of entitlement to contractual indemnification" as [1] the resolution does not convey a clear right to indemnification and [2] Plaintiff was ordered to pay restitution in connection with a guilty plea to disorderly conduct in satisfaction of an… [read post]
27 May 2010, 11:25 am
Poirier cites three awards in particular that she says reflect what plaintiffs who have suffered somewhat comparable non-pecuniary losses to hers have been awarded: Hooper v. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Barking initially proposed that the whole family should return to Nigeria, but after Birmingham City Council v Clue [2011] 1 WLR 99, in view of Ms A’s article 8 application for leave to remain, Barking offered Ms and her two children support and accommodation under s.17 Children Act 1989. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:30 pm
Barking initially proposed that the whole family should return to Nigeria, but after Birmingham City Council v Clue [2011] 1 WLR 99, in view of Ms A’s article 8 application for leave to remain, Barking offered Ms and her two children support and accommodation under s.17 Children Act 1989. [read post]
9 Jan 2016, 7:12 am
Alex Loomis walked us through the Department of Justice’s amicus brief in Weinstein v. [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 3:11 pm
The court dismissed on the merits plaintiff's complaint that her rosary beads and religious self-help books were confiscated while she was in punitive segregation.In Hall v. [read post]
1 Jan 2013, 5:42 pm
The AmeriKat ready to pounce on any jolly intruderthat dare touch her Christmas tree It has been an embarrassingly long time since the AmeriKat has stretched her US paws, owing mainly to becoming the UnitaryPatKat for much of the past year. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 10:18 am
Eliot Kim summarized the latest Foreign Intelligence Sovereign Immunities Act case: Jam v. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 5:33 pm
The Ninth Circuit in Dukes v. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 8:14 am
The Divisional Court thought so in Hooper v. [read post]
20 Apr 2006, 10:04 am
There is no doubt that Her Majesty's Government has a discretion as to what assistance should be given (if any) in a given case. [read post]
16 Jun 2018, 7:30 am
They also discussed Doe v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 10:16 am
Case Name: Concerned Citizens of Spring Creek Ranch v. [read post]
27 May 2012, 5:42 pm
Chris Huhne MP’s partner Carina Trimingham has lost her privacy claim against Associated Newspapers, with Tugendhat J refusing permission to appeal ([2012] EWHC1296 (QB)). [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:24 pm
See e.g., Hooper v. [read post]
25 Nov 2019, 3:52 am
” How does Hooper come into play in disputes between closely-held business owners? [read post]
