Search for: "McKinney v. McKinney"
Results 441 - 460
of 649
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Apr 2023, 5:45 am
Law § 624 (McKinney). [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 8:02 am
In ABC, Inc. v. [read post]
4 May 2019, 12:39 pm
See Hay v. [read post]
23 May 2015, 9:00 pm
., Petitioner, v. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 3:47 am
McKinney, 5th District holds that speedy trial on latter OVI charge did not begin to run until time of charge, not time of arrest… In State v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 3:54 am
Davis and capital resentencing case McKinney v. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 4:25 am
Connors, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C3025:3 at 87, citing Mendoza v Mendoza, 4 Misc 2d 1060, 1061 [Sup Ct, NY County 1947], affd 273 App Div 877 [1st Dept 1948]). [read post]
15 Aug 2018, 4:41 am
New York courts have previously recognized the distinction between professional malpractice and ordinary negligence in the medical malpractice context (e.g., Yaniv v Taub, 256 AD2d 273, 274 [1st Dept 1998] [“failure to communicate significant medical findings to a patient or his treating physician is not malpractice but ordinary negligence”]; McKinney v Bellevue Hosp., 183 AD2d 563, 565 [pt Dept 1992] [permitting claim of simple negligence… [read post]
12 Aug 2022, 5:01 am
Ct. 1744 (2017). [9] Rosenberger v. [read post]
11 Apr 2015, 11:19 am
The test is one of "usefulness and reason"(Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. [read post]
12 Jan 2016, 10:03 am
The court of appeals distinguished State v. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 8:22 pm
In a notable Tennessee opinion, Timothy Terell McKinney v. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 2:57 am
Under these circumstances, the cross motion is time-barred (see Podlaski v Long Is. [read post]
4 Jul 2016, 2:10 pm
’ A `written document’ `broadly covers all sorts of reports’ (Preiser, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 11A, CPL § 240.20, at 341) and includes, for example, a diagram of a rape victim's vagina in her medical record (People v. [read post]
23 Jan 2008, 3:45 am
People v. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 12:56 pm
Two recent decisions dealing with mandatory retirement policies reveal that the issue is still relevant despite amendments to human rights legislation in most (if not all) provinces to remove the "cap" of 65 years from the definition of "age".The first case is Esprey v. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 6:04 am
See also Gaouette v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 5:31 pm
McKinney School of Law. [read post]
2 May 2014, 5:31 pm
McKinney School of Law. [read post]
