Search for: "Matter of Greenfield"
Results 421 - 440
of 853
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2010, 11:30 am
In Greenfield’s case, the judge excused high profile defense lawyer Gerry Shargel. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 4:53 pm
And from there, it was only a matter of time before Twitter became inevitable. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 4:46 am
Scott Greenfield commented on the new wave of blawgs bringing vitality back to the blawgosphere. [read post]
19 Jan 2010, 1:53 pm
For my part, when I ran businesses and law schools, I regarded it as very much a matter of give and take. [read post]
18 Aug 2015, 11:46 am
Eighty percent (80%) of the CEQA lawsuits targeted “infill” – as opposed to “sprawl” or “greenfield” development. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 5:25 am
But Greenfield, IT WORKED!!! [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 4:44 am
A client’s continuing re-evaluation of their attorney as the matter progresses; 4. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 4:06 am
Write an episode of Friends featuring my mean-ass editor Scott Greenfield. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 5:36 am
Research, of course, is another matter – but in time? [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 10:38 pm
It doesn’t matter how smart you are. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 4:42 am
This perspective only makes sense if you think of vaccination as a matter of conscience, like religion, and not a matter of social responsibility, like (say) speed limits. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 3:00 am
Then he committed career suicide by suing a boatload of bloggers for defamation, including me, in a case quickly dubbed by Scott Greenfield as Rakofsky v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 5:00 am
Unionized Employee in Safety-Sensitive Position The matter of GreenFirst Forest Products (QC) Inc. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 5:00 am
Unionized Employee in Safety-Sensitive Position The matter of GreenFirst Forest Products (QC) Inc. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 6:35 pm
More: Gamso, Greenfield, who says that Regan is his anonymous commenter, "John R. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 5:16 pm
Scott Greenfield’s post notes that people believe the economy must be good for criminal defense attorneys, since they believe more people will commit crimes. [read post]
3 Dec 2011, 7:31 pm
It does matter. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 3:53 am
There was then a spirited debate in the comments, including some curmudgeonly remarks from Scott Greenfield (who followed up on his blog) about the need for the rule. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 6:38 pm
Where the motion papers demonstrate that the defendant’s right to testify before the grand jury has not been “scrupulously protected,” the “mandatory language” of CPL § 190.50(5) “creates what is a ministerial duty on the part of the court to dismiss an indictment obtained in violation of a defendant’s right to appear before the Grand Jury” (Matter of Borrello v Balbach, 112 AD2d 1051 [2nd Dept 1985]; see also, People v Mason, 176… [read post]
23 Jun 2013, 10:09 am
Scott Greenfield didn't, though it did take him a week to get around to writing about it. [read post]
