Search for: "v. Motor Vehicle Department" Results 441 - 460 of 1,366
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Aug 2023, 3:30 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Maursky v Latham 2023 NY Slip Op 04115 Decided on August 2, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department seems to be a fair decision, yet doesn’t really say why the court reversed the grant of dismissal. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 12:25 am
The fact that the defendant was found to be "oblivious" in the moments leading up to the accidents underscores the People's argument that the defendant's conduct, at the time of his drinking while intending to drive a motor vehicle thereafter, evinces an "utter disregard for the value of human life" (People v Feingold, 7 NY3d at 296). [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 4:53 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In May 2015, the plaintiff retained the defendants to represent him in a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on May 4, 2015. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 8:36 am
Weymer “improperly impounded a motor vehicle and failed to act in a courteous, dignified, and businesslike manner in violation of New York State Police Rules and Regulations. [read post]
16 Jan 2017, 7:11 am by MBettman
Ford Motor Co., 2007 WL 3087959 (Oct.4, 2007) (certifying class of consumers alleging design defects in the placement of fuel tanks in CVPI and other Panther-platform vehicles) Miller v. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 5:43 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“The plaintiff retained the defendants Banilov & Associates, P.C., and Nick Banilov (hereinafter together the Banilov defendants) to represent him in connection with an action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of a motor vehicle accident (hereinafter the underlying action). [read post]
25 Jul 2007, 5:58 am
However, the same day that the Second Department decided Abbas, the Court also decided Van Nostrand v Froehlich, 2007 NY Slip Op 06108. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 5:30 am by The Public Employment Law Press
The local law defined residency as "the actual principal place of residence of an individual, where he or she normally sleeps; normally maintains personal and household effects; the place listed as an address on voter registration; and the place listed as his or her address for driver's license and motor vehicle registration, if any" (Local Law No. 3 [1996] of City of Niagara Falls). [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins, Esq.
Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, 946 A.2d 1123 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2006), and held that PennDOT is now only immune from suit in guiderail claims in limited circumstances, thereby allowing the plaintiffs to bring more actions against PENNDOT in auto accident cases.In another recent stunning reversal, the new Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned 30 years of precedent with its holding that the involuntary movement of a vehicle can constitute an “operation” of a… [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 10:04 am by Sarah Woolston
Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s) hours-of-service requirements, as the Ninth Circuit recently upheld a Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) determination applicable to drivers of property-carrying commercial motor vehicles (International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 2785 v. [read post]
2 Jan 2008, 11:20 pm
In this phase of the litigation, a New York federal district court refused to permit the Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles to amend her answer to raise an Establishment Clause defense, finding that religious speech was not involved. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 4:12 am by Beth Van Schaack
Ford Motor Company, a case involving corporate complicity in the system of apartheid, for persuasive reasoning in this regard). [read post]
6 May 2009, 4:08 am
The underlying rationale is that since these post-Koken claims arise out of the same "transaction or occurrence," i.e. the same motor vehicle accident and involve similar factual and legal issues, they should be consolidated under one lawsuit. [read post]
31 Jan 2009, 10:31 am
And, leave it to the New York Court of Appeals to hold that the failure of the Department of Motor Vehicles to develop such standards did not invalidate the law. [read post]