Search for: "NO PARTY v. NO PARTY" Results 601 - 620 of 119,875
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
We have so far left open the possibility that injuries caused by the intentional acts of a third party might in some cases satisfy the requirements for ADR, and continue to do so today (see Matter of Walsh v Scoppetta, 18 NY3d 850, 852 [2011]; see also McCambridge v McGuire, 62 NY2d 563, 567 [1984] [the focus of the inquiry is on "the precipitating cause of injury"]; Arthur A. [read post]
24 May 2024, 4:00 am by Melanie Hodges Neufeld
[v] Shawn Burton, “The Case for Plain-Language Contracts” (April23, 2024), online: <hbr.org> [https://hbr.org/2018/01/the-case-for-plain-language-contracts]. [read post]
24 May 2024, 3:58 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
” “A cause of action alleging a violation of Judiciary Law § 487 “requires, among other things, an act of deceit by an attorney, with intent to deceive the court or any party” (Shaffer v Gilberg, 125 AD3d 632, 636 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Cordell Marble Falls, LLC v Kelly, 191 AD3d 760, 762). [read post]
24 May 2024, 1:49 am by Tessa Shepperson
We all wait to see with interest what the party’s manifestos say about housing. [read post]
23 May 2024, 3:51 pm by Rick Hasen
The following is a guest post from Travis Crum: The wait for Alexander v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 2:12 pm by randywallace
Earlier today, the Mississippi Supreme Court released its opinion in Allen v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 1:23 pm by Amy Howe
The issue at the center of the case was how courts should distinguish between the roles played in redistricting by race and party affiliation, when there are often close correlations between the two. [read post]
23 May 2024, 12:25 pm by Lawrence Solum
In August of 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the case of Hamilton v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 5:27 am by Jacob Ford Ridgeway
For example, there appeared to be agreement that, in general, the party most in favor of active judicial limits on executive action was the party currently out of office. [read post]