Search for: "State v. So "
Results 4421 - 4440
of 117,877
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Nov 2023, 6:41 am
Longarzo * DMCA’s Unhelpful 512(f) Preempts Helpful State Law Claims–Stevens v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 6:05 am
” Kansas v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 5:07 am
Sulier v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:59 am
So this process is producing results. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:50 am
Harrow v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:33 am
Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
After all, Atlas Roofing Co. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 5:36 pm
Servs., Inv. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 3:07 pm
Case law even tells us that the writing can take many forms — Andrews v McKim, 355 So.3d 957, 962 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023): Email. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 2:05 pm
—Mark Twain 1Theodore v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 1:12 pm
The justices have agreed to decide the following issue: “Whether district courts, in determining whether the due process clause requires a state or local government to provide a post-seizure probable-cause hearing prior to a statutory judicial-forfeiture proceeding and, if so, when such a hearing must take place, should apply the “speedy trial” test employed in United States v. $8,850 and Barker v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 1:08 pm
” City of Troy v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 10:46 am
Wallace (1939), and United States v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 10:07 am
Res. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 9:49 am
Days after I wrote about the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) role for litigants here in the R.B. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 8:41 am
MacNeil contends doing so violates the Supreme Court’s “ordinary remand rule” established in I.N.S. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 6:05 am
The case, Dada v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 6:00 am
However, said the court, citing Matter of Park v DiNapoli, 123 AD3d 1392; Matter of Walters v DiNapoli, 82 AD3d 1487; and Matter of Rivera v DiNapoli, 78 AD3d 1295, "the issue distills to whether the Retirement System successfully rebutted the heart presumption, which, in turn, required the Retirement System to demonstrate -- through expert medical proof -- that Petitioner's cardiac condition was caused by risk factors other than his employment". [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 6:00 am
However, said the court, citing Matter of Park v DiNapoli, 123 AD3d 1392; Matter of Walters v DiNapoli, 82 AD3d 1487; and Matter of Rivera v DiNapoli, 78 AD3d 1295, "the issue distills to whether the Retirement System successfully rebutted the heart presumption, which, in turn, required the Retirement System to demonstrate -- through expert medical proof -- that Petitioner's cardiac condition was caused by risk factors other than his employment". [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 4:02 am
Props., LLC v Penske Truck Leasing Co., L.P., 195 AD3d 1502, 1502-1503; Mazzurco v PII Sam, LLC, 153 AD3d 1341, 1342; Desiderio v Geico Gen. [read post]
