Search for: "U. S. v. King"
Results 461 - 480
of 580
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jul 2011, 1:17 pm
U. [read post]
29 Aug 2022, 9:05 pm
”14 During the Trump Administration, the FTC challenged Facebook’s (now Meta’s) acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp from 2012 and 2014, respectively. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 4:55 am
“Failing to pay tax liabilities is corporate mismanagement,” ruled the Court in Fernandes v Matrix Model Staffing, Inc. (2022 NY Slip Op 31317(U) [Sup Ct, NY County 2022]), “which defeats a petitioner’s reasonable expectations sufficient to constitute oppression” under Section 1104-a of the Business Corporation Law (the “BCL”). [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 2:09 pm
King’s guilty plea should not be binding where he was not permitted to enter an Alford plea. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 6:58 am
Martin Luther King, Jr. [read post]
25 Oct 2005, 10:00 pm
Aunque algunos choferes eran más flexibles, otros llevaban la prohibición hasta sus últimas consecuencias: el pasajero negro tenÃa que pagar el boleto en la parte de adelante, para luego bajarse del micro y entrar por la puerta de atrás para que ni siquiera posara sus pies sobre el sector blanco.Parks fue arrestada y se la condenó a pagar una multa de u$s 10 , más… [read post]
6 Jan 2020, 7:53 am
” Upon her response of “ok,” Anderson sent the message: “When you arrived I wanted to do u,” and this emoji: United States v. [read post]
7 Aug 2017, 4:00 am
U. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 12:53 pm
Maryland, 373 U. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 5:45 am
See People v. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 3:05 pm
Moore, 562 U. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
26 Mar 2021, 2:53 am
Burger King Corp. v. [read post]
10 Mar 2020, 8:43 pm
As the UK’s Serious Organized Crime Agency warned advertisers, “By incorporating advertising from recognized brands the website administrator attempt[s] to make the site appear legitimate. [read post]
12 Mar 2019, 6:49 am
King, 2018 WL 4868127 (N.J. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 3:48 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
11 Jan 2021, 4:46 am
Now there’s a fourth, Bak v Rostek, 2020 NY Slip Op 33142(U) [Sup Ct Kings County Sept. 25, 2020], in which a 47.5% member of a single-asset realty-holding LLC sold his membership interest to the other 52.5% member for around $900,000 based on a $1.9 million valuation assigned by the buying member. [read post]