Search for: "United States v. York"
Results 521 - 540
of 14,144
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2024, 6:00 am
IOP E(b); United States v. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 3:27 pm
Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a disappointing decision in United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 4:35 pm
” The New York Times v CIA No.18-2112-cv, concerning whether national security cases which the president had tweeted about, brings the information at issue for FOIA requests. [read post]
6 Feb 2009, 9:16 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 7:00 am
The Courts that have upheld warrantless GPS searches have cited the 1983 Supreme Court decision, United States v. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 9:01 pm
New York’s Gov. [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 2:14 pm
See United States v. [read post]
23 Sep 2020, 8:18 am
Of interest in recent years is the fact that unlike over 20 other States in the United States and many jurisdictions internationally,* New York has never recognized any post-mortem rights of publicity. [read post]
18 Nov 2023, 4:28 am
” Representative Roscoe Conkling of New York claimed he did not violate this statute when taking a paid position as a federal prosecutor after being elected to Congress. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 9:38 am
In August 2011, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that four Caucasian flight engineers can pursue their employment discrimination claims in New York, against a Japanese air cargo carrier. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 6:05 pm
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York City agreed with the lower court that the confirmation of the award must also be sought in Bulgaria, not in the United States under Article V of the Convention on the Recognation and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958. [read post]
29 Jun 2013, 1:56 pm
In United Airlines v. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 10:55 am
Although the challengers in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
28 Aug 2009, 4:09 am
States and political subdivisions of states are not employers within the meaning of the National Labor Relations ActFord v D.C. 37 Union Local 1549, CA2d Circuit, Docket No. 08-2317-cvRoxanne Ford appealed a judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New dismissing her complaint alleging that DC-37 breached the duty of fair representation.Ford, however, had filed her claims against DC-37 pursuant to the federal Labor… [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 10:23 am
See United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 7:30 pm
In Donohue v Cuomo, 2022 NY Slip Op 00910, the New York State's Court of Appeals said:"In Kolbe v Tibbetts, [it] left open whether a New York court should infer vesting of retiree health insurance rights when construing a collective bargaining agreement* (CBA) (see 22 NY3d 344, 354 [2013]). [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 5:00 am
In response to questions certified to [it] by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, [the New York State Court of Appeals concluded] that Yard-Man-type inferences favoring such vesting are likewise inconsistent with New York's established contract interpretation principles. [read post]
5 Mar 2022, 3:58 am
In response to questions certified to [it] by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, [the New York State Court of Appeals concluded] that Yard-Man-type inferences favoring such vesting are likewise inconsistent with New York's established contract interpretation principles. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 7:30 pm
In Donohue v Cuomo, 2022 NY Slip Op 00910, the New York State's Court of Appeals said:"In Kolbe v Tibbetts, [it] left open whether a New York court should infer vesting of retiree health insurance rights when construing a collective bargaining agreement* (CBA) (see 22 NY3d 344, 354 [2013]). [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 5:00 am
In response to questions certified to [it] by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, [the New York State Court of Appeals concluded] that Yard-Man-type inferences favoring such vesting are likewise inconsistent with New York's established contract interpretation principles. [read post]
