Search for: "Park v. Respondent"
Results 41 - 60
of 2,453
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Aug 2023, 10:59 am
One might be misled by thinking that the lawsuit is only about a dining table, counter or parking space. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 9:42 am
It is especially glaring to see police respond with resistance, impatience, and ultimately often-discriminate force and arrests of largely peaceful Floyd protests on public parks and sidewalks, while calmly de-escalating or ignoring heavily armed people in paramilitary gear in a space (the halls of the statehouse) they did not have a right to be in. [read post]
28 Oct 2022, 1:18 pm
Supreme Court in support of the petition for writ of certiorari pending in Novak v. [read post]
27 Mar 2009, 9:40 am
The officer responded with lines like: "Shut your mouth. [read post]
25 Feb 2013, 2:31 pm
The New York Fire Department responded to the scene, but the fire truck driver parked the truck in front of the vehicle that was on fire. [read post]
17 Oct 2010, 8:19 am
The officer here responded to a 911 domestic disturbance call involving a name the officer recognized as a troublemaker (for want of a better way to put it), and the officer arrived and saw him on an apartment building parking lot. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 2:55 am
[Smith v. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 3:05 pm
Giboney v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:42 am
Bell v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 4:48 pm
Abruzzo v. [read post]
24 Dec 2010, 9:37 am
""Based on Popple v. [read post]
23 Jul 2014, 5:33 am
The government responded by filing a motion for summary judgment. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 6:12 pm
Commonwealth v. [read post]
19 Jan 2022, 3:44 am
Lapsley v. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 4:01 am
Jekyll Island-State Park Authority v. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 6:03 pm
iStock From Thursday’s Bridgeville Rifle & Pistol Club v. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 4:20 pm
Summum that a Utah city need not accept a "Seven Aphorisms" monument for a local park where a 10 Commandments monument already stood, it remanded to the lower courts a more complicated companion case, Summum v. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 12:40 pm
Indeed, in Capitol Square Review Bd. v. [read post]