Search for: "York v York" Results 4201 - 4220 of 52,973
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Feb 2023, 8:35 am
Today's advance release family law opinion: Gershon v. [read post]
14 Feb 2023, 5:55 am by Hans Corell
  IMAGE: Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations Vasily Nebenzya speaks during a United Nations General Assembly special session at the United Nations headquarters on October 10, 2022 in New York City. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:59 am by David Kopel
This post lists all the sources cited by the majority opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 7:00 am by GSU Law Student
New York: Modern Library, pp. 113–114. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 6:20 am by Matthew J. Sinkman
See id.[8]See 43 RCNY §§ 1402(s), (cc).[9]See 43 RCNY §§ 1474(a)(4)(C)(iv)-(v).[10]See 43 RCNY § 1407(l)(3).[11]See 43 RCNY § 1480.[12]See New York City Admin. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 6:20 am by Matthew J. Sinkman
See id.[8]See 43 RCNY §§ 1402(s), (cc).[9]See 43 RCNY §§ 1474(a)(4)(C)(iv)-(v).[10]See 43 RCNY § 1407(l)(3).[11]See 43 RCNY § 1480.[12]See New York City Admin. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 6:20 am by Matthew J. Sinkman
See id.[8]See 43 RCNY §§ 1402(s), (cc).[9]See 43 RCNY §§ 1474(a)(4)(C)(iv)-(v).[10]See 43 RCNY § 1407(l)(3).[11]See 43 RCNY § 1480.[12]See New York City Admin. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 4:55 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
On reply, Willard argued that “the law in New York plainly favors a buy-out as opposed to the liquidation of an on-going company – certainly one like Matrix that employs several dozen or hundreds of people at any given time. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 4:31 am by Emma Snell
This is according to a statement made by the press service of Yevgeny V. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 12:30 pm by John Ross
The event will feature panels on official accountability—including an appearance from one of the plaintiffs in Monroe v. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 9:50 am by Public Employment Law Press
In Schacht v City of New York, 39 NY2d 28, the Court of Appeals noted that the relevant collective bargaining agreement expressly provided that the unauthorized absence of a tenured employee in the Classified Service for 10 consecutive workdays could be deemed to constitute a resignation by the appointing authority. [read post]