Search for: "SCHNEIDER v. STATE" Results 101 - 120 of 378
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Nov 2021, 2:43 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
See, e.g., id. at 1075 (interpreting a contract incorporating the 2010 UNCITRAL rules); Republic of Argentina, 665 F.3d at 1371 (1976 UNCITRAL rules); Schneider, 688 F.3d at 73–74 (1976 UNCITRAL rules); Petrofac, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 1:17 pm by Wells Bennett
  Regarding “injury,” Schneider said, the question for trial was not the kind of harm that Kiriakou’s alleged disclosures had wrought, but whether he had reason to believe that such disclosures could be used so as to injure the United States. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 5:26 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Group, Inc., 30 NY3d 288, 298 [2017]; AG Capital Funding Partners, L.P. v State St. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 3:54 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]
20 Feb 2007, 4:24 am
The Nov. 28th entry also includes a link to the 7th Circuit opinion of that date, Entertainment Software Ass'n. v. [read post]
23 Nov 2010, 2:40 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The absence of such privity remains a bar against her estate malpractice claims (Estate of Schneider v Finmann, 15 NY3d 306 [2010]). [read post]
18 Oct 2008, 9:28 pm
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY - SUBROGATION - DIRECTED VERDICT Insurance Co. of State of Pa. v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 4:09 am by Stan
Like many journalists who covered the A/V product case, Schneider apparently believes that the dispute was about China’s film quota. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 4:56 am by Timothy P. Flynn
Jill Stein, in her capacity as a presidential candidate, and Louis Novak, in his capacity as a Michigan voter, filed a timely petition with the Michigan State Board of Canvassers seeking a state-wide vote recount. [read post]
14 Jan 2009, 3:33 am
This decision is important as it assesses the relevance and distinguishes two, somewhat dated, New York Court decisions, Schneider v. [read post]