Search for: "Hamilton v. City of New York" Results 81 - 100 of 225
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Nov 2012, 3:54 am by Rob Robinson
Compiled from online public domain resources, provided for your review/use is this week's update of key industry news, views, and events highlighting key electronic discovery related stories, developments, and announcements.For a live daily view of industry news, click here for the Vendor Clips Live News Feed.Follow @InfoGovernanceeDiscovery News Content and ConsiderationsCourt Orders Retention of Outside Vendor to Collect Responsive Documents,… [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 3:56 am by Amy Howe
  Commentary on the decision comes from Susan Freiwald at ACSblog, Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times, and Yishai Schwartz in The New Republic. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 2:39 am by Amy Howe
Commentary on Monday’s decision in City of Los Angeles v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 3:36 am by Amy Howe
Today the Court will hear oral arguments in City of Los Angeles v. [read post]
28 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by Noah Brown
Supreme Court allowed New York to enforce a firearm law—passed in response to the Court’s decision in Bruen—that adds requirements for obtaining gun licenses and restricts carrying guns in more public places. [read post]
18 May 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Administrative Law Judge Tiffany Hamilton recommended a 3-day suspension for a caseworker charged with engaging in discourteous and threatening conduct toward her supervisor. [read post]
18 May 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings Administrative Law Judge Tiffany Hamilton recommended a 3-day suspension for a caseworker charged with engaging in discourteous and threatening conduct toward her supervisor. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 4:08 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
, 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 4:21 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Thus, the plaintiff’s loss of any claims against those attorneys was due to its own failure to pay the delinquent franchise taxes and to timely recommence the action against those attorneys (see CPLR 205[a]), and was not the result of Hurst’s delay in asserting the defense (see generally CPLR 203[f]; Pendleton v City of New York, 44 AD3d 733, 736; [*3]cf. [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
Spending in election cycles by corporations and the ultrawealthy through so-called dark money groups has skyrocketed since the 2010 Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. [read post]