Search for: "Change v. State" Results 421 - 440 of 50,441
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 5:17 am by Jan von Hein
The jurisprudence on names (in particular Grunkin and Paul) shows that the fact that a Member State does not have its own procedure for such changes (according to de la Tour, this concerns only 2 Member States for gender changes) does not constitute an obstacle to the recognition of a change lawfully made in another Member State (nos. 73-74). [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:31 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
What if Thomas now wants to change status to O-1B classification based on the acclaim he has received as a violinist? [read post]
Starbucks (10(j) Relief Standard):  On April 23, 2024, oral argument before the United States Supreme Court took place in Starbucks Corp. v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 6:43 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
In this case, the New York Court of Appeals chips away a little further on eyewitness testimony and holds that the criminal conviction needs to be vacated.The case is People v. [read post]
That tack changed when the consolidated cases were transferred to state court. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
The FTC summarily states that a “hypothetical monopolist of accessible luxury handbags likely would undertake a SSNIPT on consumers” and could do so profitably. [read post]