Search for: "Lowe v. Lowe" Results 61 - 80 of 15,396
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
However, a September 2019 New York State intermediate appellate court decision – Vega v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
Employment Relationship Complicated by the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic The recent case of Hurlbut v Low & Low Limited involved the plaintiff (“MH”), a funeral director who was hired by the defendant employer (the “employer”) as a full-time funeral director in December of 2018. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
Employment Relationship Complicated by the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic The recent case of Hurlbut v Low & Low Limited involved the plaintiff (“MH”), a funeral director who was hired by the defendant employer (the “employer”) as a full-time funeral director in December of 2018. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 4:28 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Although summary judgment is not appropriate in a malpractice action where the parties submit conflicting expert opinions, “expert opinions that are conclusory, speculative, or unsupported by the record are insufficient to raise triable issues of fact” (Longhi v Lewit, 187 AD3d 873, 877 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Lowe v Japal, 170 AD3d 701, 702). [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 2:02 pm by Howard Knopf
This was preceded by the Court’s 2015 decision in Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 7:16 am by Michael C. Dorf
§ 1512) that was at issue in yesterday's oral argument in Fischer v. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 6:36 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
This case is a good example of how all of this works.The case is Dorsey v. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 10:03 pm by Marcel Pemsel
ZERO MEAT v MEAT ZERO Background On 29 September 2021, CPF Food and Beverage Co., Ltd. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 1:11 pm by Giles Peaker
FG, R (On the Application Of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (2024) EWHC 780 (Admin) This was a judicial review of RBKC, asserting discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 in RBKC’s failure to make physical adaptations to a flat occupied by RBKC’s tenant, Ms FG, to meet her disability related needs. [read post]