Search for: "State v. Hearst"
Results 101 - 120
of 168
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Aug 2019, 5:13 am
Hearst Corp. (2d Cir. 2015).) [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 9:46 am
Defamation "necessarily . . . involves the idea of disgrace" (Bytner v Capital Newspaper, Div. of Hearst Corp., 112 AD2d at 667). [read post]
30 May 2011, 5:19 pm
” Citing Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 109 AD2d 92, affd 67 NY2d 562, the Appellate Division said that the legislative history of §50-a indicates that the "statute was intended to apply to situations where a party to an underlying criminal or civil action is seeking documents in a police officer's personnel file, and was apparently designed to prevent 'fishing expeditions' to find material to use in cross-examination. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 6:00 am
Hearstand Yakus v. [read post]
11 May 2012, 1:29 pm
In February, the firm filed a suit in the Southern District of New York asserting that the Hearst Corporation illegally employed hundreds of unpaid interns in violation of federal and state wage law (Wang v The Hearst Corporation, No. 12 Civ. 0793). [read post]
13 May 2013, 7:18 am
State v. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 3:01 pm
Univ. of Wash., 125 Wash.2d 243, 251, 884 P.2d 592 (1994) (pluralityopinion) (quoting Hearst Corp. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 11:00 am
Circuit decisions (Hearst v. [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 8:13 am
I have also filed an amicus brief in Martin v. [read post]
6 Sep 2006, 3:33 pm
Supreme Court cases, including Houchins v. [read post]
26 Apr 2020, 4:25 pm
Nicklin J ruled that the meaning of Murray’s tweet was that Riley “had publicly stated in a tweet that he [Mr Corbyn] deserved to be violently attacked”. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 9:03 pm
In the case of Mink v. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 7:50 am
* Capitol Records LLC v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 7:37 am
The court cited Hearst Corp. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 4:00 am
White v. [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 6:28 am
"); Bahr v. [read post]
4 May 2018, 11:58 pm
The California Supreme Court recognized this in Dynamex, stating: As the United States Supreme Court observed in Board v. [read post]
3 May 2018, 3:00 am
However, the Court of Appeals instructs that FOIL is to be "liberally construed and its exemptions narrowly interpreted so that the public is granted maximum access to the records of government" (Matter of Town of Waterford v New York State Dept. of Envtl. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods to protect against their parallel importation into the United States. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
The Software and Information Industry Association, arguing that “the Copyright Act contains the flexibility to deal with unforeseen applications of section 602″, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods… [read post]
