Search for: "U. S. v. King"
Results 121 - 140
of 570
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Nov 2020, 6:16 am
2020 NY Slip Op 33374(U) September 30, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 8651/05 Judge: Ingrid Joseph is the latest case in which the Leeds Morelli paradigm of “anti-discrimination” litigation is exposed. [read post]
30 Sep 2020, 6:15 am
Jahrhunderts v. [read post]
14 Sep 2020, 6:00 am
In Ofman v Tenenbaum Berger & Shivers LLP 2020 NY Slip Op 32828(U) July 23, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 524482/2019 Judge: Richard Velasquez, Plaintiff alleged that had the attorney been quicker, the defendant would not have been able to leave the US and the judgment would have been collectible. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 4:51 am
Realty Associates LLC v Blumberg, 2020 NY Slip Op 32200(U) [Sup Ct NY County July 7, 2020] The aptly named S.O.S. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 9:26 am
To support this point, Alito compared Thuraissigiam’s requested relief to the type of relief the Supreme Court previously rejected in a 2008 case Munaf v. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 5:16 am
Wong v Yeung-Ha 2020 NY Slip Op 31832(U) June 11, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 505276/18, Judge: Karen B. [read post]
20 Jun 2020, 3:16 pm
" King v. [read post]
18 Jun 2020, 7:56 am
" Chenery II, 332 U. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 5:55 am
“Proximate cause requires a showing that ‘but for’ the attorney’s negligence, the plaintiff would . . . not have sustained any ascertainable damages” (Barbara King Family Trust v Voluto Ventures LLC, 46 AD3d 423, 424 [1st Dept 2007]). [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 3:28 am
Manno v Hayes Law Practice, PLLC 2020 NY Slip Op 31228(U) May 6, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 520104/16 Judge: Edgar G. [read post]
29 May 2020, 3:00 am
King & Gardiner Farms, LLC v. [read post]
11 May 2020, 5:41 am
in Postiglione v Sacks & Sacks, LLP 2020 NY Slip Op 31164(U) April 17, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 513779/2019 Judge: Edgar G. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
8 May 2020, 5:58 am
Brownstein, Sabastian V. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
15 Apr 2020, 9:59 am
That's the decision he's telling us he's already made. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 2:30 pm
Both of these adjustments are based on increases in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) published by the United States Department of Labor. [read post]
