Search for: "Sees v. Sees"
Results 4241 - 4260
of 121,980
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jul 2007, 5:38 am
Following up on its story July 17th (see this ILB entry) on Monday's Court of Appeals decision in Anita Stuller, et al v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 10:13 am
(See ABC Internat. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 10:16 am
See this post last July. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 4:00 am
See Obama pushes bank reform, lashes out at GOP, Reuters, April 17, 2010 ("Bank shares and the broader stock market fell on fears the civil lawsuit could make it more difficult for the financial industry to ward off reform. [read post]
26 May 2015, 2:00 pm
Courts have recognized that under Penal Law § 35.10(1) a parent may use physical force against a child when he reasonably believes it to be necessary to promote discipline or the child's welfare (see Fields, 134 AD2dat 365; see People v Prue, 219 AD2d 873 [4th Dept 1995]; People v Thompson, 9 Misc 3d 1123[A] [City Ct, Westchester County 2005]). [read post]
26 Dec 2018, 1:00 am
Standard Under Auer v. [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 1:37 pm
Co. v. [read post]
7 May 2017, 11:00 pm
The key authority on joint tortfeasorship comes from Fish & Fish v Sea Shepherd (see the judgment being handed down on the UK Supreme Court blog here!). [read post]
3 Oct 2007, 2:45 pm
By Eric Goldman National Federation of the Blind v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 5:56 pm
If you are a Denver-area lawyer, I hope to see you there. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 8:56 pm
See Ledbetter v. [read post]
19 Oct 2017, 4:00 am
(See Eggert v. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 2:08 pm
I could see why someone might say "Yes. [read post]
8 Feb 2013, 12:15 pm
I can't necessarily see anything wrong with the legal analysis in this opinion. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
In Weksler v Kane Kessler, P.C. ;2009 NY Slip Op 04957 ;Decided on June 16, 2009 ;Appellate Division, First Department we see the fatal duo of lack of privity and lack of proximity. [read post]
30 Mar 2018, 12:35 pm
How often does one see a multiplicity victory? [read post]
23 Mar 2022, 3:28 am
“An attorney may not be held liable for failing to act outside the scope of a retainer” (Attallah v Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP, 168 AD3d 1026, 1028 [2d Dept 2019]; see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435 [2007]). [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 11:42 am
See Smith v. [read post]
21 May 2018, 9:05 pm
See Bilida v. [read post]
3 May 2013, 9:50 am
(See Sam Issacharoff's recent paper on SSRN on this point.)Not only was Erie not particularly necessary to the New Deal Revolution, but the case it overruled, Swift v. [read post]