Search for: "Doe v. Doe Governmental Entity"
Results 81 - 100
of 1,554
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Dec 2016, 9:00 am
In the case, Gonzales v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 9:00 am
In the case, Gonzales v. [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 1:00 am
" In affirming the Bankruptcy Court, the BAP noted that a leading case, Krystal Energy Co. v. [read post]
22 Sep 2015, 8:29 pm
The merits of a claim brought against a governmental entity, or the State itself, do not matter. [read post]
11 Jan 2024, 2:58 pm
And HB20 does so in a way that will promote more speech, not less. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 3:58 am
In Parrott v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 1:19 pm
Under sovereign immunity, governmental entities may be immune from lawsuits arising from the negligence of their employees. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 6:29 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 1:41 pm
State v. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 6:04 am
At first glance, you would think plaintiffs could not sue the community access channel because it is a private entity, and the constitution does not regulate private entities. [read post]
10 Aug 2022, 6:01 am
In Costner v. [read post]
9 May 2022, 5:05 am
The Appellate Division, noting that a writ of mandamus "is available to compel a governmental entity or officer to perform a ministerial duty, explained that the writ "does not lie to compel an act which involves an exercise of judgment or discretion" and citing Matter of Brusco v Braun, 84 NY2d 674, explained that such a writ is "an extraordinary remedy that is available only in limited circumstances. [read post]
9 May 2022, 5:05 am
The Appellate Division, noting that a writ of mandamus "is available to compel a governmental entity or officer to perform a ministerial duty, explained that the writ "does not lie to compel an act which involves an exercise of judgment or discretion" and citing Matter of Brusco v Braun, 84 NY2d 674, explained that such a writ is "an extraordinary remedy that is available only in limited circumstances. [read post]
9 May 2022, 5:05 am
The Appellate Division, noting that a writ of mandamus "is available to compel a governmental entity or officer to perform a ministerial duty, explained that the writ "does not lie to compel an act which involves an exercise of judgment or discretion" and citing Matter of Brusco v Braun, 84 NY2d 674, explained that such a writ is "an extraordinary remedy that is available only in limited circumstances. [read post]
9 May 2022, 5:05 am
The Appellate Division, noting that a writ of mandamus "is available to compel a governmental entity or officer to perform a ministerial duty, explained that the writ "does not lie to compel an act which involves an exercise of judgment or discretion" and citing Matter of Brusco v Braun, 84 NY2d 674, explained that such a writ is "an extraordinary remedy that is available only in limited circumstances. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 11:55 am
When the negligence of a person, business, or governmental entity results in legal harm to someone, the injured party is entitled to damages such as payment of medical expenses, reimbursement for lost wages, and compensation for pain and suffering. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 6:24 am
However, if you look at the statutory provisions at issue here, there does appear to be some logic behind it. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 6:56 am
Government immunity does not apply in every situation in which a government employee or entity causes an injury. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 6:24 am
However, if you look at the statutory provisions at issue here, there does appear to be some logic behind it. [read post]
23 Jun 2019, 5:05 pm
The court responds plainly: the First Amendment applies only to governmental abridgements of speech, and not to alleged abridgements by private companies like Facebook…A private entity that provides a forum for speech does not engage in an activity that the government has traditionally and exclusively performed, and so does not qualify as a state actor subject to First Amendment constraints Cite to Halleck, which I will blog soon. [read post]
