Search for: "State v. Daniels"
Results 21 - 40
of 4,961
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2025, 3:10 pm
United States (HE), which the Supreme Court decided in 1935. [read post]
31 Mar 2025, 1:58 am
United States A US court has dismissed a lawsuit brought against journalism credibility rating organisation NewsGuard, ruling that the company’s reviews are protected expressions of opinion. [read post]
28 Mar 2025, 4:05 pm
Daniel G. [read post]
26 Mar 2025, 6:12 am
The Court of Appeals has upheld a permanent injunction against the New York State prison system, agreeing with the district court that DOCCS did not provide necessary medication to inmates in violation of the Constitution.The case is Daniels v. [read post]
26 Mar 2025, 5:02 am
On December 5, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon granted preliminary approval to a proposed class action settlement that would resolve claims brought under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) and Oregon state law. [read post]
24 Mar 2025, 9:53 am
The Board's stated justification is the kind of viewpoint discrimination proscribed by the Court in Rosenberger v. [read post]
22 Mar 2025, 8:17 am
– Jack Daniel’s v. [read post]
21 Mar 2025, 11:02 am
– 34.1 United States v. [read post]
20 Mar 2025, 5:00 am
Harding v. [read post]
18 Mar 2025, 11:56 am
"] A short excerpt from the 9,000-word U.S. v. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 6:00 am
Although this Court is "not bound to adhere to federal standing requirements" (US Bank N.A. v Nelson, 36 NY3d 998, 1003 n 4 [2020] [Wilson, J., concurring]), under New York law, plaintiffs must nevertheless demonstrate that they suffered an "injury in fact" (Matter of Mental Hygiene Legal Serv. v Daniels, 33 NY3d 44, 50 [2019] [internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 6:00 am
Although this Court is "not bound to adhere to federal standing requirements" (US Bank N.A. v Nelson, 36 NY3d 998, 1003 n 4 [2020] [Wilson, J., concurring]), under New York law, plaintiffs must nevertheless demonstrate that they suffered an "injury in fact" (Matter of Mental Hygiene Legal Serv. v Daniels, 33 NY3d 44, 50 [2019] [internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]
16 Mar 2025, 9:05 pm
At the colloquium, several scholars reported that some jurisdictions in the world – and some U.S. states – allow for a more moderate and permissive interpretation of fiduciary duties. [read post]
15 Mar 2025, 12:46 pm
Co. v. [read post]
14 Mar 2025, 8:55 am
Daniel J. [read post]
11 Mar 2025, 12:27 pm
From Copeland v. [read post]
11 Mar 2025, 8:25 am
" Pickering v. [read post]
11 Mar 2025, 5:57 am
While the governing executive orders make it clear that no one has a “right” to a security clearance, even the Supreme Court in the landmark decision Department of the Navy v. [read post]
[Stephen Halbrook] Second Amendment Roundup: Court Seems Disposed to Rule for S&W and Against Mexico
9 Mar 2025, 6:44 pm
Daniel Defense, et al., No. 24-1822 (4th Cir.) [read post]
8 Mar 2025, 9:01 am
See Liza Danielle, Inc. v. [read post]
