Search for: "State v. Walsh" Results 901 - 920 of 1,264
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Dec 2010, 4:35 am
Employee may be terminated on the grounds that he or she make a material false statement of his or her application for employmentMatter of Walsh v Kelly, 2010 NY Slip Op 09346, Decided on December 16, 2010,* Appellate Division, First DepartmentNew York City Civil Service Commission, after a hearing, affirmed the determination of the New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services to disqualify and terminate Gary Walsh as a New York City police officer.The… [read post]
19 Dec 2010, 6:33 am by Máiréad Enright
Via a tweet from @RTEHistoryShow comes a reminder that on December 19, 1973, the Supreme Court established the constitutional right to marital privacy in McGee v. [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 4:24 am by SHG
         An excellent example of this trend can be found in the Wisconsin case of State v. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 7:35 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Beck, Esquire of the Erie, Pennsylvania law firm of Shapira, Hutzelman, Berlin, Ely, Smith & Walsh for forwarding this Order to my attention.Joseph v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 1:58 pm
Supreme Court (with Justice Elena Kagan recused) in Los Angeles County v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 12:00 am by Jeff Gamso
Only the personnel of this Court did.Again, it's endemic.When the votes come out my way (as when the Ohio Supremes decided in State v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 12:00 am by Jeff Gamso
Only the personnel of this Court did.Again, it's endemic.When the votes come out my way (as when the Ohio Supremes decided in State v. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 4:18 am by Russ Bensing
™  In State v. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 6:53 am by James Bickford
  Prominent among the docketed cases is Schwarzenegger v. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 7:14 am by Kali Borkoski
On Tuesday, the Court will hear arguments in Schwarzenegger v. [read post]
25 Oct 2010, 1:35 pm by Sex Offender Issues
The need for this legislation arose from the Ohio Supreme Court’s ruling on State v. [read post]
22 Oct 2010, 7:18 am by GuestPost
The Board stated that there was an ‘enormous difference’ between an agreement regulating a state of affairs between married couples (a postnup) and an agreement purporting to regulate an uncertain marital future (a prenup). [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 8:26 pm by Steve Bainbridge
As Vice Chancellor Walsh observed, “[S]hareholders do not possess a contractual right to receive takeover bids. [read post]