Search for: "STATE v. LOWE"
Results 41 - 60
of 10,539
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 May 2024, 4:17 pm
However, the likelihood of this beef ever reaching the courts is low. [read post]
14 May 2024, 2:46 pm
” Tennessee v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 3:51 am
Timing Rule 262A.3 RoP states that “The Application shall be made at the same time as lodging a document containing the information or evidence and shall provide a copy of the unredacted relevant document and, if applicable, a copy of the redacted document. [read post]
10 May 2024, 10:38 am
The car owners in this case had argued that due process does give them a right to a prompt hearing under Mathews 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]
10 May 2024, 6:45 am
See NCAA v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 2:30 am
ACD submitted that whilst there was no actual problem in doing so, there was a perception at the time of low or no expectation of success when seeking to take an in vitro technique in situ, and this was relevant in assessing obviousness. [read post]
9 May 2024, 11:42 am
The ADA was not intended to create equality by bringing everyone down to the same low level of participation in the economic and social life of the United States. [read post]
8 May 2024, 7:25 am
In Raytheon Co. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
7 May 2024, 2:47 pm
Almost 30 years ago, SCOTUS issued its opinion in United States v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:01 pm
The FTC summarily states that a “hypothetical monopolist of accessible luxury handbags likely would undertake a SSNIPT on consumers” and could do so profitably. [read post]
6 May 2024, 2:34 pm
This was the case in SnapRays, d/b/a SnapPower v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 10:42 am
Rational basis review presents a low bar for the state to clear. [read post]
6 May 2024, 8:39 am
Until 2016, different jurisdictions in the United States had different rules regarding art confiscated due to Nazi persecution. [read post]
6 May 2024, 5:01 am
In Doe v. [read post]
3 May 2024, 12:30 pm
[Eagle-eyed readers might notice that the court cites Saunders v. [read post]
3 May 2024, 11:33 am
Over 30 states and dozens of localities have adopted the IHRA definition. [read post]
