Search for: "New York Life Ins. Co. v. Cross"
Results 21 - 40
of 44
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Apr 2012, 6:05 am
It examined the history of New York’s no fault divorce law. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 8:43 am
Although plaintiff did not pursue her cross appeal, plaintiff's counsel stated in an affirmation that the cross appeal involved a narrow issue that appellate counsel had indicated did not affect her fee. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 6:25 am
Dukes and AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 3:05 pm
Unum Life Ins. [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 3:08 am
Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d 314, 326; see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d at 87), the complaint herein sufficiently alleges a cause of action in negligence against the SLS defendants and the SLS employees (see Rivera v New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, 191 F Supp 2d at 421; see also Williams v State of New York, 84 AD3d 412). [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 2:22 pm
Metropolitan Life Ins. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 9:12 pm
Companion Life Ins. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 10:18 am
New York Life Ins. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:20 pm
“From the beginning of his time as a Justice, you could see Stevens’s roots in the New Deal Court and his willingness to justify an expanding welfare state,” Richard Epstein, a libertarian-leaning law professor at New York University, said. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 7:31 am
Co. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 10:14 am
“From the beginning of his time as a Justice, you could see Stevens’s roots in the New Deal Court and his willingness to justify an expanding welfare state,” Richard Epstein, a libertarian-leaning law professor at New York University, said. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 7:01 am
Co., 29 AD3d at 547; Tracy v William Penn Life Ins. [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 10:36 am
Co. v Bonilla, 269 AD2d 599; New York Cent. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 9:24 pm
Co., 12 AD3d 1110; Acquista v New York Life Ins. [read post]
22 Nov 2009, 7:02 pm
Ctr. v New York Cent. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 11:37 am
Most Cited CasesPurported foreclosure forbearance agreement was subject to the statute of frauds, since the agreement attempted to modify the note and deed of trust; it substituted a new monthly payment for the monthly payment required under the note, and it altered the lender's ability to exercise a right to foreclose under the note and deed of trust due to the borrower's default. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 7:23 am
Co., 4 NY3d at 476; Matter of New York Cent. [read post]
28 Apr 2009, 7:14 am
Co. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2009, 4:29 am
Co. v Swinton, 27 AD3d 462 [2006]; Shell v Fireman's Fund Ins. [read post]
21 Oct 2008, 8:23 am
Account, 15 AD3d 529, 532 [2d Dept 2005] [quoting Matter of Dodgertown Homeowners Assn. v City of New York, 235 AD2d 538, 539 (2d Dept 1997)].) [read post]
