Search for: "State v. Murphy "
Results 1281 - 1300
of 2,307
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Feb 2015, 3:19 am
Although Man Choi Chiu contends that the LLC’s records were incorrect, he cannot subsequently take a position contrary to that taken in the income tax returns which he admitted that he signed (see Mahoney-Buntzman v Buntzman, 12 NY3d 415, 422; Livathinos v Vaughan, 121 AD3d 485; Winship v Winship, 115 AD3d 1328; Czernicki v Lawniczak, 74 AD3d 1121, 1125; Peterson v Neville, 58 AD3d 489). [read post]
14 Feb 2015, 6:54 pm
In the matter of Murphy v. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 2:25 am
" (Nevins, Murphy, Flood v Portroe Stevedores - EDA051 - [2005] ELR 282). [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 3:55 pm
Texas DPS v. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 3:55 pm
Texas DPS v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 1:15 pm
State Bd. of Educ. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 1:12 pm
Referring to counter-terrorism cases and relevant public protocols in the UK, his presentation demonstrated the complexity of state secrets, the supervision of security intelligence agencies, and the tension between human rights and national security. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 8:40 am
Murphy v. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 7:48 am
Judge Murphy ruled against them on this and noted that the UK judgement states there must be evidence “that the computer was operating correctly at the relevant time”. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 5:00 am
Div. 1943) (plaintiff injured when a Murphy bed in a room she rented collapsed and struck her) Johnson v. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 6:14 am
Murphy. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am
More from Europe: In Case C-355/12 Nintendo v PC Box the CJEU said that circumventing a protection system may not be unlawful. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 1:00 pm
Matteoni, Matteoni O’Laughlin & Hechtman, San Jose, California, Edward V. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 4:03 am
Mary v. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 4:15 am
The linked cases of C-403/08 Football Association Premier League Ltd and Others v QC Leisure and Others and C-429/08 Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd where the CJEU held that copyright owners must authorise any communication to the public and such authorisation was required where a person makes the protected work "accessible to a new public", and then finally the TVCatchup case C‑607/11 ITV v… [read post]
The parol evidence rule is not a rule of evidence, even though it governs admissibility of testimony
18 Nov 2014, 6:00 pm
Ennis State Bank, 159 Tex. 166, 317 S.W.2d 30, 31 (1958); Gonzalez v. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 1:32 pm
AUTHOR: Maggie Murphy. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 9:55 pm
(See Luzano v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:27 pm
Evans v. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 10:13 am
Horton, Inc. v. [read post]
