Search for: "Grant v. Department of Corrections"
Results 781 - 800
of 3,071
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 May 2022, 4:00 am
Assn., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v Pataki, 259 AD2d 826, 827-828 [1999], lv dismissed and denied 93 NY2d 993 [1999]; Matter of McGuinn v City of New York, 219 AD2d 489, 490 [1995], lv dismissed and denied 87 NY2d 966 [1996]; Matter of Cassidy v New York City Dept. of Correction, 95 AD2d 733, 734-735 [1983]; Matter of Serth v New York State Dept. of Transp., 79 AD2d 801, 802 [1980]). [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 3:05 am
The Supreme Court will therefore have to decide whether the broad interpretation remains correct or whether to depart from Buchanan (under the Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) [1966] 1 WLR 1234). [read post]
16 Oct 2017, 8:55 am
The highest-profile grant of the day came in United States v. [read post]
3 May 2012, 5:51 pm
Specifically, the new section of the law would state: (v) ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 3:28 pm
The justices announced on Friday that they had granted review in Muldrow v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 7:39 am
On Friday, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled in Hobbs v. [read post]
25 Feb 2017, 9:08 pm
Here, even though the Department of Buildings previously granted a permit based on a finding that the sign fell within the above exception to the Zoning Resolution, the court determined it was entitled to correct the mistake that led to its approval of the permit. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 8:02 pm
In his famous opinion in <em>NFIB v. [read post]
11 Nov 2019, 3:22 am
Further, the Court of Appeal had been right to depart from Thirlwall LJ’s finding that Travelers had nothing to do with the uninsured claims. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 8:36 am
", in the way that experienced bankruptcy attorneys would.The result reached by the majority was clearly and obviously the correct result. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 2:50 am
While this analysis produces a harsh result, it is probably correct under Tennessee law. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 6:13 am
In Caiozzo v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:17 pm
"Findlaw summaries [may] include opoinions that have not yet been released for publication and may be subject to modification, correction or withdrawl U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008 US v. [read post]
20 Aug 2014, 8:38 am
Although it recited the correct standard, it erroneously found that the employee presented “no evidence whatsoever” to support her claim that there was a delegation of final policy making authority to the sheriff’s department employees who allegedly retaliated against her. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 12:41 pm
" Justice Gabriel is correct. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 12:54 pm
(Application 07A373, Warner and Ryan v. [read post]
23 Dec 2021, 6:00 am
Dept. of Correctional Servs. v Kinsella, 220 AD2d 19, 22). [read post]
23 Dec 2021, 6:00 am
Dept. of Correctional Servs. v Kinsella, 220 AD2d 19, 22). [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 1:18 pm
Yates, the Justice Department was not even permitted to defend the order. [read post]
