Search for: "Black v State of New York" Results 1461 - 1480 of 2,019
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2012, 5:39 am
The New York Times' John Cushman looks at the "few principal questions the court's ruling will answer. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 7:30 am by Guest Blogger
  The only no vote was by Peter Yates of New York. [read post]
9 Jul 2023, 4:35 pm by INFORRM
New Issued Cases There were no new cases issued on the media and communications list last week. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 6:32 pm
Aug. 21, 2009) (adopting the Second Circuit's conclusion that "[t]he difference between the federal law's requirement of a 'substantial step' and the New York law's requirementof 'dangerous proximity' is...'more semantic than real'" (quoting United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Indeed, as one federal court recently stated, “the ‘crypto’ nomenclature may be of recent vintage, but the challenged transactions fall comfortably within the framework that courts have used to identify securities for nearly eighty years. [read post]
18 Apr 2008, 2:00 am
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 8:49 am by Amy Howe
On January 15, the court issued its first 5-4 decision of the term, in Stokeling v. [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 2:58 pm by Eugene Volokh
Harleston (2d Cir. 1992), a federal appeals court upheld a professor's First Amendment rights to express "denigrating comments concerning the intelligence and social characteristics of blacks" (there, in a book review, a letter to an academic journal, and a letter to the New York Times). [read post]
25 Nov 2008, 9:17 am
In 1735, Andrew Hamilton urged a New York jury to ignore the law of England and to acquit Peter Zenger of criminally libeling the colonial governor of New York. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm by Gianna Hill
In a recent report, Viral V. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 1:09 pm by Bexis
You betcha.In state after state, whether product liability is common-law or statutory, and whether it’s based on the Second or Third Restatement, courts have refused to allow plaintiffs to make claims asserting that legal products should not have been sold at all. [read post]