Search for: "State v. Purcell"
Results 121 - 140
of 176
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Apr 2019, 4:40 am
The complaint further alleges that the defendant’s negligence proximately caused the plaintiffs to sustain actual and ascertainable damages in lost rent and in settling the action brought by the Hive, and thus, validly states a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 443; Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d 843, 847; Wolstencroft v Sassower, 124… [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 12:49 pm
Professor Rick Hasen has some thoughts on RNC v. [read post]
29 Jan 2008, 10:35 am
The Supreme Court said something similar in Purcell v. [read post]
6 Apr 2020, 3:33 am
” At The George Washington Law Review’s On the Docket blog, Jasper Tran and Cameron Baker write that Allen v. [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 6:03 am
Arguing for state and local officials in Arizona v. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 7:42 pm
” He stated that the Purcell principle required the court to stay the injunction with respect to 2022 elections and if the lower court’s judgment was affirmed after appellate review, the injunction would take effect for congressional elections after 2022. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 3:23 pm
Brayton-Purcell, S198438 – Review Granted and Held– January 18, 2012. [read post]
5 May 2019, 4:41 pm
United States The New York Law Journal reports that a libel claim filed [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 2:22 pm
The plea by Ohio authorities relies heavily upon thoe Supreme Court’s per curiam ruling two years ago in Purcell v. [read post]
19 May 2017, 12:23 pm
Co. v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 11:28 am
” (relisted after the September 26, October 7, and October 14 conferences) Purcell v. [read post]
15 Jan 2021, 10:41 am
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. [read post]
17 Oct 2024, 12:51 pm
The court granted that stay in May, citing the Purcell principle – the idea that courts should not make changes too close to the election. [read post]
28 Oct 2024, 2:31 pm
Last year, in Moore v. [read post]
18 Oct 2014, 2:32 am
In doing so, the Fifth Circuit panel relied heavily on a 2006 Supreme Court decision cautioning courts not to put changes in voting laws into effect close to election day (Purcell v. [read post]
11 Jan 2010, 4:02 am
In light of this limitation, we decided in Purcell v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 7:43 am
(relisted after the September 26 and October 7 conferences) Purcell v. [read post]
30 Jul 2009, 4:16 am
Colo. 2008) (alleged "direct violation of the Code of Federal Regulations" too general to state violation), Heisner v. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
Ed Purcell most fully (and movingly) captures this thought. [read post]
24 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
Purcell Professor Robert C. [read post]
