Search for: "State v. C. R."
Results 8061 - 8080
of 13,583
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2021, 2:46 pm
However, that does not entail preservation of all the elements of which the system consists: cf Secretary for Justice v Lau Kwok Fai & Anor[39]; applied in Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong v Secretary for Justice[40] ; (b) there is no challenge to the constitutionality of NSL 46(1); and (c) in view of: (i) the special status of the NSL as a national law enacted with a specific purpose of safeguarding national security; and (ii) the… [read post]
24 Jul 2017, 8:01 am
In NLRB v. [read post]
5 Aug 2024, 10:46 am
Co. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 4:44 pm
In Re Beech, Saint v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 3:48 am
[See Civil Service Law Section 75.1(c)]Mancuso claimed the school board violated the due process rights of the employees in the disciplinary process. [read post]
11 Nov 2009, 1:24 pm
The case is Florida Wildlife Federation v. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 3:42 am
Moreover, as used in Delaware law, the term “misappropriation” often implies dishonest or wrongful intent, or breach of duty (see e.g. 6 Del C § 2001 [1], [2] [misappropriation of trade secrets]; In re Vanderslice, 55 A3d 322, 326 [Del 2012] [attorney committed theft by "misappropriating" client funds]; Lingo v Lingo, 3 A3d 241, 242, 244 [Del 2010] [attorney-in-fact committed a "breach of trust" by misappropriating funds]). [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 9:46 pm
V. [read post]
31 Oct 2007, 8:23 am
Rev. 321 *** Gregory R. [read post]
14 Apr 2016, 4:59 pm
§ 78u-5(c). [read post]
22 May 2009, 5:08 am
’s Messenger program infringed asserted claims and infringement was wilful: Creative Internet Advertising v Yahoo! [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 7:25 am
Dee v. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 9:16 am
He is, of course, the author of Parker v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 1:28 pm
L. c. 233, § 20. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 3:38 pm
Fam C § 2550. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 6:20 am
The plaintiff’s state law claims also failed (Goldberg v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 11:56 am
However, at the hearing, respondent, citing Matter of Ruiz v MVAIC (19 AD2d 832 [2d Dept 1963]) and Byrd v Johnson (60 AD2d 900 [2d Dept 1978]) and their progeny, argued further that, even if the court is satisfied that petitioner has otherwise complied with subdivision (b) of section 5218 of the Insurance Law, petitioner, in order to satisfy the "reasonable efforts" requirement of subdivision (b) (5), must first exhaust his remedy and conclude a subdivision (c)… [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 6:00 pm
The recent California appellate decision, Cypress Semiconductor Corp. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 12:53 pm
See Mountain Bird, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2018, 3:23 am
She cited in support an article by Brandon Kain, Elder C. [read post]
