Search for: "Opinion Corp."
Results 21 - 40
of 14,207
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 May 2024, 10:00 am
Corp., 18 NY3d 499, 503 [2012]), the custodian engineer's generalized testimony that she would regularly test the door and determine that it was functioning safely and properly, by itself and without any expert analysis, failed to establish, prima facie, defendant's entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Lugo v Belmont Blvd. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am
Smith Corp., 521 U.S. 179, 191 (1997), citing Connors v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 7:36 am
And so began Charles Breyer’s scathing 52-page opinion in the recent X Corp. v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 7:16 am
But the plaintiffs push back on the idea that there is a circuit split at all, arguing that the PSLRA’s stay on discovery means that some allegations will lack full evidentiary support in early stages of the litigation (NVIDIA Corp. v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:45 am
Exxon Mobil Corp., 2024 WL 2091994, No. 21-CV-4807 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:41 am
M&F Worldwide Corp. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
& Gas Corp., 183 AD3d 1207, 1209 [3d Dept 2020]; see also Executive [*4]Law § 809 [2] [b]; 9 NYCRR 572. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
& Gas Corp., 183 AD3d 1207, 1209 [3d Dept 2020]; see also Executive [*4]Law § 809 [2] [b]; 9 NYCRR 572. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am
Neither petitioner nor the court identified any "substantive law applicable to the parties' dispute" to support application of the doctrine of manifest disregard of law (Schiferle, 155 AD3d at 127; see Matter of Daesang Corp. v NutraSweet Co., 167 AD3d 1, 21 n 15 [1st Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 915 [2019]). [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am
Neither petitioner nor the court identified any "substantive law applicable to the parties' dispute" to support application of the doctrine of manifest disregard of law (Schiferle, 155 AD3d at 127; see Matter of Daesang Corp. v NutraSweet Co., 167 AD3d 1, 21 n 15 [1st Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 915 [2019]). [read post]
10 May 2024, 12:15 am
Corp. [read post]
9 May 2024, 3:59 pm
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 2:26 pm
In the following guest post, James L. [read post]
8 May 2024, 12:09 pm
Zircon Corp. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
7 May 2024, 8:12 am
,” she wrote in her 2022 opinion, which was upheld in 2023 by the U.S. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:17 pm
Army Corps of Engineers, No. 23-5189, the D.C. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:20 am
From today's Fourth Circuit opinion in Doe v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 3:32 am
Under New York law, a testifying expert can rely on hearsay as a basis for his opinion only where (1) the out-of-court material is of a kind accepted in the profession as reliable as a basis in forming a professional opinion, and (2) there is evidence presented establishing the reliability of the out-of-court material referred to by the witness (Hambsch v New York City Tr. [read post]