Search for: "State v. Martinez" Results 821 - 840 of 1,777
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Dec 2023, 6:55 am by Johanna Silver
South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and AR NAACP v. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 8:07 am by Gritsforbreakfast
Lawyers across the country, including those for at least two Texas death row inmates, were eagerly awaiting the court’s ruling in the Martinez v. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 5:00 am by Maureen Johnston
Hurles 14-191Issue: (1) Whether, under this Court's decision in Martinez v. [read post]
16 Jul 2007, 11:34 am
& R.S., and Cynthia Shannon a/k/a Cynthia Martinez v. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 9:55 am
”  The Circular Letter requires insurers to treat all couples in New York, including same-sex couples who were legally married outside of New York, equally.The NYID’s position follows a decision in February 2008, Martinez v. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 5:12 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Accepting the facts as alleged in the complaint as true, and according the plaintiff the benefit of every possible favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d at 87-88), the complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action alleging legal malpractice against the law firm defendants (see Shaya B. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 3:37 pm by A
  Apologies for the delay in posting this; just dropped the in-laws off at LAX and am catching up on things.At any rate, I say "good" rather than "great" because while Martinez v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 3:52 pm by jleaming@acslaw.org
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has flat out refused to follow the Supreme Court’s March 2012 Martinez v. [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 6:47 am by Erin Miller
Jaffe and New York Times v. [read post]
27 Sep 2017, 4:14 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
These factual allegations, as supplemented by plaintiffs’ papers in opposition to defendant attorney’s dismissal motion, sufficiently alleged a legal malpractice claim (see generally Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]; see Brooks v Lewin, 21 AD3d 731, 734 [1st Dept 2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 713 [2006]; Escape Airports [USA], Inc. v Kent, Beatty & Gordon, LLP, 79 AD3d 437 [1st Dept 2010]). [read post]
9 Feb 2007, 2:58 pm by Veronica
Because dangers associated with the use of a ladder to climb over a lift gate are common and obvious, the Court held that Jack in the Box had no duty to warn Skiles about the dangers of using a ladder.Late Interpleader: In State Farm Life Insurance Co. v. [read post]