Search for: "State v. Schneider" Results 81 - 100 of 434
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Dec 2022, 6:22 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Ullmann-Schneider v Lacher & Lovell-Taylor, P.C., 121 AD3d 415, 416 [1st Dept 2014]; Goldfarb v Hoffman, 139 AD3d 474, 475 [1st Dept 2016]; Cascardo v Dratel, 171 AD3d 561, 562 [1st Dept 2019]; see CPLR 3211[a][1], [7]). [read post]
22 Nov 2013, 4:30 am by Karen Tani
Here are some of today's offerings (if I've missed anything, please use the comments section below to alert our readers):Unfamiliar narratives of undocumented immigration: New perspectives on belonging and exclusion Dorothee Schneider -- Chair, DiscussantGrace Delgado, The Sexual Self: Morals Policing at North American Borders, 1875-1910 Libby Garland, Naturalization Fraud in the Era of U.S. [read post]
22 Sep 2007, 9:19 am
Reed also wants the Supreme Court to grant a change of venue for a follow-up hearing on the issue.The Clerk's Docket lists this case as: Case Number: 45 S 00 - 0709 - OR - 00366; STATE OF INDIANA EX REL LAKE CTY BD OF ELEC -V- LAKE SUP CT [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 6:23 am by Ted Folkman
In post-9/11 decisions, the Sixth Circuit and , in Rusmfeld v. [read post]
9 Apr 2022, 9:58 am by Katherine Pompilio
Anderson were joined by Molly Reynolds to discuss the week’s big national security news including alleged war crimes committed by Russian forces in Ukraine and Torres v. [read post]
23 Nov 2013, 4:30 am by Karen Tani
From Chicago to Santiago: The Formation and Impact of the ‘Chicago Boys and Girls’Robert Van Horn, "Corporate Funders, Edward Levi, and the Rise of Chicago Law and Economics in the 1950s"Paul V. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Cunningham & Ute Römer-Barron, Four Reasons the Supreme Court Should Reconsider Its Article III Standing Doctrine, (Forthcoming, Ohio State Law Journal Online, v. 85, 2024).Elias Neibart, M.A. v. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 4:21 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“Plaintiffs’ complaint here, as supplemented, sufficiently states a cause of action that defendants aided and abetted another person’s removal of funds belonging to plaintiffs, hid the funds in their escrow account, and used those funds to pay the other person’s personal and business expenses (see DDJ Mgt., LLC v Rhone Group L.L.C., 78 AD3d 442, 443 [1st Dept 2010]). [read post]