Search for: "Day v. State"
Results 61 - 80
of 60,060
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 May 2024, 6:00 am
[FN1] The IRC must conduct this review "and approve or deny [*3]each candidate" within 30 days (Executive Law § 94 [3] [b]). [read post]
15 May 2024, 6:00 am
[FN1] The IRC must conduct this review "and approve or deny [*3]each candidate" within 30 days (Executive Law § 94 [3] [b]). [read post]
14 May 2024, 10:15 pm
This includes documents recently disclosed as a result of the settlement of Penebaker v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 7:59 am
When asked to describe the impact, the employee stated, “[v]ery light, not harsh at all,” and said he hit the plaintiff with his shoulder. [read post]
14 May 2024, 7:15 am
With respect to pre-existing MTE-related contracts, we temporarily waive section 64.2500 with respect to these contracts for BIAS-only providers for a period of 180 days. [read post]
13 May 2024, 9:06 pm
Italy enacted a ban last year, and Florida and Alabama enacted their laws on the books in only the last few days. [read post]
13 May 2024, 2:05 pm
In Stone Surgical, LLC v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 7:36 am
As a result, judges have provided two landmark opinions in the last 45 days in favor of web scrapers. [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:59 am
Facts – This case (Patterson v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 4:54 am
In addition, a Satisfaction of Judgment was filed on February 24,2021 stating that the Judgment was paid in full and the sum of $0.00 remains unpaid (NYSCEF Doc. [read post]
13 May 2024, 12:57 am
Also on the same day, there was a preliminary issues hearing in the case of Jeremy Vine v Joey Barton KB-2024-000733. [read post]
12 May 2024, 9:05 pm
ENDNOTE [1] Basic v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 9:01 pm
” In addition, if more states enact fair access laws, financial institutions may be required to comply with an increasing number of fair access laws that may be inconsistent from state to state. [read post]
12 May 2024, 1:42 pm
VILER, Appellants, v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 6:55 am
In Tuskia v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 3:51 am
It appears that divisions may also be discussing their approaches amongst each other given that they cite each other’s decisions that are issued in the same week or even on the same day. [read post]
11 May 2024, 7:46 am
The court rejected those arguments because it had already decided in Licavoli v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 5:37 pm
The California Supreme Court’s decision in Naranjo v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:01 am
Circuit’s application of the Fitzgerald test in Blassingame 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]
