Search for: "Sees v. Sees" Results 101 - 120 of 121,469
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
What does "excusable neglect" mean under the Federal Rules?
17 Jun 2024, 12:46 pm by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
That is what happened here.The case is Doe v. [read post]
Wait A Second! - http://secondcircuitcivilrights.blogspot.com/
[Eugene Volokh] "What Happens … When Two School Employees Suspect That Their Colleague is Under the Influence
17 Jun 2024, 11:11 am by Eugene Volokh
Ky.) in Lawson v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
"Schools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in their charge and they will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49; see D.M. v Yonkers City Sch. Dist., 220 AD3d 672). "Schools are not insurers of safety, however, for they cannot reasonably be expected to continuously supervise and control all movements and activities of students" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d at 49; see R.B. v Sewanhaka Cent. High Sch. Dist., 207 AD3d 607, 609).
17 Jun 2024, 11:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"Schools are not insurers of safety, however, for they cannot reasonably be expected to continuously supervise and control all movements and activities of students" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d at 49; see R.B. v Sewanhaka Cent. [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
"Schools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in their charge and they will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49; see D.M. v Yonkers City Sch. Dist., 220 AD3d 672). "Schools are not insurers of safety, however, for they cannot reasonably be expected to continuously supervise and control all movements and activities of students" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d at 49; see R.B. v Sewanhaka Cent. High Sch. Dist., 207 AD3d 607, 609).
17 Jun 2024, 11:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"Schools are not insurers of safety, however, for they cannot reasonably be expected to continuously supervise and control all movements and activities of students" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d at 49; see R.B. v Sewanhaka Cent. [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
[Eugene Volokh] Is Promotion of Free Services "Commercial Speech" for First Amendment Purposes?
17 Jun 2024, 10:33 am by Eugene Volokh
See, e.g., Del Castillo v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
Trade Secret Misappropriation Preliminary Injunction Reversed
17 Jun 2024, 10:02 am by Dennis Crouch
See Winter v. [read post]
Patently-O - https://patentlyo.com
Democracy on Trial: Chestek and the Future of USPTO Accountability
17 Jun 2024, 8:25 am by Dennis Crouch
See Pub. [read post]
Patently-O - https://patentlyo.com
Will Biometric Privacy Laws Undermine the Fight Against CSAM?–Martell v. X
17 Jun 2024, 8:25 am by Eric Goldman
–Martell v. [read post]
Technology & Marketing Law Blog - http://blog.ericgoldman.org/
Can the Government Ignore Red Flags of Set-Aside Fraud?
17 Jun 2024, 6:51 am by David Timm
Later my colleague Diana McGraw and I argued for it in Accura Eng’g & Consulting Servs., Inc. v. [read post]
The Federal Government Contracts & Procurement Blog - https://governmentcontracts.foxrothschild.com/
Truth, Trust, and AI: Justice and Accountability for International Crimes in the Era of Digital Deception
17 Jun 2024, 6:06 am by Raquel Vázquez Llorente
Earlier this year, it was referenced in the hearings at the International Court of Justice for the case of South Africa v. [read post]
Just Security - https://www.justsecurity.org/
Appellate Division held employee sufficiently alleged that, due to his race and/or gender, his sexual harassment complaint was not taken seriously or appropriately investigated by the employer and he was disciplined more harshly than other employees
17 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Corp., 175 AD3d 1132 [1st Dept 2019]; see also La Porta v Alacra, Inc., 142 AD3d 851, 852 [1st Dept 2016]). [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
Appellate Division held employee sufficiently alleged that, due to his race and/or gender, his sexual harassment complaint was not taken seriously or appropriately investigated by the employer and he was disciplined more harshly than other employees
17 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Corp., 175 AD3d 1132 [1st Dept 2019]; see also La Porta v Alacra, Inc., 142 AD3d 851, 852 [1st Dept 2016]). [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
Pro-Se Case Dismissed, Although CPLR 3211(a)(1) Dismissal is Without Prejudice
17 Jun 2024, 3:41 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Moreover, the complaint fails to allege fraud with any particularity (see CPLR 3016[b]; see Browne v Lyft, Inc., 219 AD3d 445, 447 [2d Dept 2023]; Shah v Mitra, 171 ADed 971, 976 [2d Dept 2019]). [read post]
New York Attorney Malpractice Blog - http://blog.bluestonelawfirm.com/
Court of Appeals Bolsters the Internal Affairs Doctrine, Takes a Stroll Through Scottish Fiduciary Law
17 Jun 2024, 3:37 am by Peter J. Sluka
  And even when an interesting business divorce issue does make its way up to Albany, it’s even more rare to see the Court of Appeals, in a case of first impression, fashion a new framework for addressing a complex question. [read post]
New York Business Divorce - http://www.nybusinessdivorce.com/
Fourth Circuit Rules that Bacardi May Challenge USPTO's Renewal of HAVANA CLUB Registration via Civil Action Under the APA
17 Jun 2024, 3:19 am
 See Bonehead Brands, LLC v. [read post]
The TTABlog - http://thettablog.blogspot.com/
Cleary Gottlieb Discusses the Context for Analyzing Force Majeure Clauses in the UK
16 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Secondly, the court considered that, while no previous case has directly answered the question raised by the appeal, the cases of Bulman & Dickson v Fenwick & Co [1894] 1 QB 179 and Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1963] AC 691 provided strong implicit support for MUR’s case. [read post]
The CLS Blue Sky Blog - https://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/
Supreme Court “Bump Stock” Case Reveals the Limits of Statutory Interpretation
16 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
For example, Justice Sotomayor’s opinion for the Court last year in Dubin v. [read post]
Verdict - http://verdict.justia.com/
The Dubai Supreme Court — Again — on the Enforcement of Canadian (Ontario) Enforcement Judgment
16 Jun 2024, 8:56 pm by Béligh Elbalti
To the contrary, and unlike the situation [under the previously applicable rules],[v] the Legislator has expanded the concept of enforceable titles (al-sanadat al-tanfidhiyya),[vi] which now includes criminal judgments involving restitution (radd), compensations (ta’widhat), fines (gharamat) and other civil rights (huquq madaniyyah). [read post]
Conflict of Laws .net - https://conflictoflaws.net
[Stephen Halbrook] Second Amendment Roundup: Bump Stocks are not Machineguns
16 Jun 2024, 8:18 pm by Stephen Halbrook
  In Sonzinski v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
From conceptual art to AI: On the Druet/Cattelan dispute and authorship of works made by someone other than the “author”
16 Jun 2024, 10:02 am by Eleonora Rosati
In this sense, decisions like those of the US Copyright Office in Zarya of the Dawn [IPKat here] and the Beijing Internet Court in Li v Liu [IPKat here] are helpful. [read post]
IPKat - http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/