Search for: "State v. Struck" Results 21 - 40 of 10,453
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" The issue raised on appeal is whether Supreme Court properly struck respondent's unverified answer (see Matter of Atwood v Pridgen, 142 AD3d 1278, 1279 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 945 [2016]).Petitioners failed to reject respondent's answer and deem it a nullity based upon the lack of a verification (see CPLR 3022). [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" The issue raised on appeal is whether Supreme Court properly struck respondent's unverified answer (see Matter of Atwood v Pridgen, 142 AD3d 1278, 1279 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 945 [2016]).Petitioners failed to reject respondent's answer and deem it a nullity based upon the lack of a verification (see CPLR 3022). [read post]
6 May 2024, 4:43 am by INFORRM
The defendants sought to have the claim struck out on the basis that the broadcast was not capable of giving rise to the imputations pleaded. [read post]
3 May 2024, 8:49 am by Eugene Volokh
Many courts have struck down campus speech codes framed in such terms, but the government and various universities have continued to assert that such speech restrictions are constitutional. [read post]
2 May 2024, 6:05 am by Jasmin Mujanović
For its part, V-Dem considers Kosovo an “electoral democracy” vs. [read post]
1 May 2024, 4:00 am by Eric Segall
Voting RightsThe Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Shelby County v. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 10:28 am by admin
Egilman always struck me as a bit too pudgy and comfortable really to yearn for a Spartan workers’ paradise. [read post]
27 Apr 2024, 2:02 pm by Dennis Crouch
Cir. 1973) (holding that Section 6(g) “empowered [the FTC] to promulgate substantive rules of business conduct”); United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 12:41 pm by Dennis Crouch
Sanofi, 598 U.S. 594 (2023) and was struck by the Supreme Court’s statement that its 19th Century decision of Wood v. [read post]