Search for: "People v. Burnes"
Results 1401 - 1420
of 1,756
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Aug 2018, 5:13 am
District Court Judge Linda V. [read post]
17 May 2011, 3:18 pm
How does he translate for her when people are talking over each other??? [read post]
7 May 2015, 4:12 am
Burn the witch! [read post]
11 Dec 2015, 3:28 am
To riff off Edmund Burke, all it takes for insanity to prevail is for sane people to do nothing. [read post]
27 Sep 2020, 5:00 am
But we’re still at the starting gate of this battle, even as the soothsayers have already condemned her for reversing Roe v. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 4:50 am
For most people, the only aspect they see, or at least remember, are the high profile names. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 6:05 am
I’m then joined by my colleague Professor Jeremy DeBeer to discuss the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision on Keatley Surveying v. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 6:15 am
Foreign Minister Sergey V. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 6:15 am
Foreign Minister Sergey V. [read post]
20 Sep 2010, 1:38 pm
I'm good at spotting trends, connecting people on social networks, and a handful of other things. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 6:10 am
Such privilege may be waived only by the person, persons or entity who has furnished information to the association or society, its members or authorized agents.Appellate Division, First DepartmentAdoption Subsidy Should Be Considered as A Resource of The Child When Determining Child Support In Barbara T v Acquinetta T, --- N.Y.S.3d ----, 2018 WL 3789133, 2018 N.Y. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 6:10 am
Such privilege may be waived only by the person, persons or entity who has furnished information to the association or society, its members or authorized agents.Appellate Division, First DepartmentAdoption Subsidy Should Be Considered as A Resource of The Child When Determining Child Support In Barbara T v Acquinetta T, --- N.Y.S.3d ----, 2018 WL 3789133, 2018 N.Y. [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 9:04 am
Burns and Branti v. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
” In 1900 this "rule of one" as then set out in then Civil Service Law §14 was struck down by the Court of Appeals as unconstitutional.In People v Mosher, 163 NY 32, the Court of Appeals held that "if the civil service commissioners have power to certify to the appointing officer only one applicant of several who are eligible and whom they have, by their own methods, ascertained to be fitted for a particular position, and their decision is final ... then… [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
” In 1900 this "rule of one" as then set out in then Civil Service Law §14 was struck down by the Court of Appeals as unconstitutional.In People v Mosher, 163 NY 32, the Court of Appeals held that "if the civil service commissioners have power to certify to the appointing officer only one applicant of several who are eligible and whom they have, by their own methods, ascertained to be fitted for a particular position, and their decision is final ... then… [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 9:00 pm
If we were to view it this way, the law would survive, according to cases such as Ward v. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 5:03 am
Georgia v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 9:02 pm
In Cruzan v. [read post]
29 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm
” In Commonwealth v. [read post]
