Search for: "U. S. v. Parker*" Results 21 - 40 of 101
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jun 2021, 2:32 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“Plaintiff’s claims arise from an underlying action captioned Shahin Guliyev v. [read post]
28 Jan 2021, 3:33 am by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
Agregó que “[u]na empresa que toma la decisión de moderarse a sí misma es diferente a un gobierno que le quita el acceso (a alguien), pero puede percibirse casi igual“5. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 8:10 am by Christopher Tyner
Judge Murphy concurred in the result only, writing a separate opinion to discuss when a witness’s immigration status and knowledge of U-Visas may be relevant for cross-examination, as well as other issues in the case. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 4:30 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Speculative assertions that the defendant’s conduct caused the plaintiff’s damages do not suffice. [read post]
29 Jun 2019, 3:12 pm by John Floyd
Penalty Provisions of Federal Gun Law Struck Down   In the opening line of a June 24, 2019 ruling in United States v. [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 4:47 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Hudson Yards LLC v Segal  2019 NY Slip Op 30996(U)  April 5, 2019  Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 158606/2014 Judge: Andrea Masley describes the unraveling of the initial Hudson Yards real estate deal and the loss of $ 50M. [read post]
12 Apr 2019, 4:26 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
” NY Prime Holding LLC v Nationstar Mtge., LLC  2019 NY Slip Op 30857(U)  March 27, 2019  Supreme Court, New York County  Docket Number: 157879/2018 Judge: John J. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 4:10 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  2019 NY Slip Op 30440(U)  February 26, 2019,   Supreme Court, New York County  Docket Number: 154213/2018. [read post]
13 Feb 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The Appellate Division agreed, explaining that arbitration awards are entitled to collateral estoppel effect and, citing Guard-Life Corp. v Parker Hardware Mfg. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 10:46 am by Kent Scheidegger
  Here is the essence of today's holding:Three Terms ago, in Johnson v. [read post]