Search for: "CTS Construction Inc" Results 1081 - 1100 of 1,219
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Feb 2014, 3:06 am by Peter Mahler
The first is CTNY Investors 3, LLC v DME CRE Opportunity Fund I LP, 2014 NY Slip Op 30268(U) [Sup Ct NY County Jan. 29, 2014], decided last month by Manhattan Commercial Division Justice Shirley Werner Kornreich. [read post]
2 Jul 2017, 8:40 pm by Dale Carpenter
That is not a construction of Obergefell—“narrow” or otherwise—but a defiance of it. [read post]
25 Mar 2020, 6:03 pm by Eugene Volokh
Connecticut Ass'n of Schools, Inc.; I expect there'll be a response to it filed, and I'll be glad to blog that as well: [A.] [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
This figure is significantly lower than in 2016, when the Delaware Court of Chancery effectively put an end to the practice of disclosure-only settlements in In re Trulia Inc. [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 9:45 am by Eugene Volokh
Under this rule of construction the residual clause should be read to give effect to the terms "seamen" and "railroad employees," and should itself be controlled and defined by reference to the enumerated categories of workers which are recited just before it; the interpretation of the clause pressed by respondent [as a catch-all covering all employees engaged in interstate or foreign commerce writ large] fails to produce these results.[9] Likewise, consider Washington… [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 3:59 am by Terry Hart
The Supreme Court a few weeks ago agreed to review the Second Circuit’s decision in ABC v. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 3:17 pm by admin
– EPA News Release, February 25, 2010 A property management company based in Meriden, CT has agreed to pay a $276,000 penalty for violating federal lead-based paint disclosure requirements. [read post]
9 Dec 2019, 1:05 am by Peter Mahler
In 2017, with financing help from Petitioner, who also personally co-guaranteed the lease, WWB constructed and opened its own boxing gym. [read post]
16 Mar 2022, 11:36 am by Eric Goldman
The court doubles down: If Amazon has actual or constructive knowledge that a product contains mercury, it might choose to review the product listing to determine whether the third-party seller had provided a Proposition 65 warning before providing the warning itself or removing the listing. [read post]