Search for: "Fail v. State"
Results 441 - 460
of 66,042
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 May 2024, 6:00 am
Indeed, even in circumstances where an arbitrator makes errors of law or fact, courts will not assume the role of overseers to conform the award to their sense of justice" (Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321, 326 [1999]). [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am
Indeed, even in circumstances where an arbitrator makes errors of law or fact, courts will not assume the role of overseers to conform the award to their sense of justice" (Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321, 326 [1999]). [read post]
10 May 2024, 5:10 am
In Pliva, Inc. v Mensing (564 U.S. 604 [2011]), the Supreme Court found that these plaintiffs’ state-law claims against generic manufacturers were preempted by federal law under the Supremacy Clause to the extent that state-law failure-to-warn statutes required generic drugs to provide more stringent, safer warning labels. [read post]
10 May 2024, 4:34 am
” People v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 3:27 am
See State v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 2:30 am
On these facts the cross-reference to Kern was too general, and the anticipation attack failed (neither document alone contained a clear and unambiguous disclosure). [read post]
10 May 2024, 12:04 am
It had eight depots spread throughout the State. [read post]
9 May 2024, 2:41 pm
S. 555 (1983), and United States v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 11:30 am
Wade, Griswold v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:45 am
The case is Jamie Allen Harless v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am
Matter of Rijos v New York City Tr. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am
Matter of Rijos v New York City Tr. [read post]
9 May 2024, 9:32 am
State v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 7:00 am
Bd., 64 F3d 184, 188 [5th Cir 1995], citing Tinker v Des Moines Indep. [read post]
9 May 2024, 7:00 am
Bd., 64 F3d 184, 188 [5th Cir 1995], citing Tinker v Des Moines Indep. [read post]
9 May 2024, 6:35 am
Intrusion upon seclusion claim: The court referred to Jones v Tsige and stated that the tort required intentional intrusion upon the seclusion of another of his private affairs. [read post]
9 May 2024, 5:55 am
Second, based on the first conclusion, and as established by the ICJ in Bosnia v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 5:29 am
The ECHR refers to the case of Đurđević v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 2:00 am
Sharp v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 12:15 pm
In Naranjo v. [read post]