Search for: "O S V Determination"
Results 1281 - 1300
of 10,086
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2022, 4:00 am
However, to date no unifying test has been identified for determining when concurrent personal liability will be imposed for corporate torts: Hall v Stewart, 2019 ABCA 98 at para. 18, 82 Alta LR (6th) 233, citing Hogarth v Rocky Mountain Slate Inc., 2013 ABCA 57 at paras. 112-3, 75 Alta LR (5th) 295, 542 AR 289; S. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 6:52 am
Spoerle v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 9:00 pm
In Padidham v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 10:00 am
Corp., 18 NY3d 499, 503 [2012]), the custodian engineer's generalized testimony that she would regularly test the door and determine that it was functioning safely and properly, by itself and without any expert analysis, failed to establish, prima facie, defendant's entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Lugo v Belmont Blvd. [read post]
15 May 2024, 10:00 am
Corp., 18 NY3d 499, 503 [2012]), the custodian engineer's generalized testimony that she would regularly test the door and determine that it was functioning safely and properly, by itself and without any expert analysis, failed to establish, prima facie, defendant's entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Lugo v Belmont Blvd. [read post]
11 Jul 2015, 6:49 pm
Lucky this case isn’t in a Canadian court.United States v. [read post]
19 Oct 2014, 4:10 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 May 2017, 8:10 am
State v. [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
Supreme Court transferred the matter to the Appellate Division, which affirmed the Sheriff's decision.Citing Matter of Kuznia v Adams, 106 AD3d 1227, the court explained that "The standard of review to be applied in reviewing an administrative determination made pursuant to Civil Service Law §75 is whether the determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
Supreme Court transferred the matter to the Appellate Division, which affirmed the Sheriff's decision.Citing Matter of Kuznia v Adams, 106 AD3d 1227, the court explained that "The standard of review to be applied in reviewing an administrative determination made pursuant to Civil Service Law §75 is whether the determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 6:34 am
Morgan Investment Management, Inc., seeking a court determination that New York State’s Martin Act (General Business Law Art. 23-A) would preempt a victimized investor’s common law causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty and gross negligence. [read post]
15 Jan 2012, 9:00 pm
Morgan Investment Management, Inc., seeking a court determination that New York State’s Martin Act (General Business Law Art. 23-A) would preempt a victimized investor’s common law causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty and gross negligence. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 12:08 am
The point is well summarised in Ms Stocker’s Grounds of Appeal [pdf], at paragraph 7: The determination of meaning is often determinative of the outcome of the claim. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 6:17 am
Rush v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 2:36 am
Unknown c/o Dora Marks, FA0506000490083 (Nat. [read post]
13 May 2016, 6:22 am
The hearing officer upheld the Director’s re-determination and repayment requirement. [read post]
7 Jul 2016, 6:46 am
Previous precedent dictates that substance trumps form in making this determination. [read post]
Jury should decide if traveling—not driving—was essential function of vision-impaired drug rep’s job
7 Mar 2016, 6:44 am
By Brandi O. [read post]
18 Feb 2017, 4:28 am
S. 496 (1987) al decidir Payne v. [read post]
15 Jan 2018, 7:44 am
Votes to Accept the Case Yes: Justices O’Donnell, French, O’Neill, and Fischer. [read post]
