Search for: "Then v New York City Tr. Auth."
Results 141 - 160
of 168
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Apr 2010, 2:38 am
In sum, the plaintiffs version of the events was "manifestly untrue, physically impossible, or contrary to common experience, and such testimony should be disregarded as being without evidentiary value" (Cruz v New York City Tr. [read post]
11 Apr 2010, 8:50 am
City of New York it’s unclear why he thought the similar injuries in Van Ness v. [read post]
2 Apr 2010, 5:25 am
New York City Tr. [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 5:25 am
New York City Tr. [read post]
22 Mar 2010, 4:15 am
Matter of Grant v New York City Tr. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 3:58 am
Matter of Village of Spring Val. v Policemen's Benevolent Assn. of Vil. of Spring Val., 271 AD2d 615; Matter of New York City Tr. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 8:19 am
Here, the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the master arbitrator's award should have been vacated pursuant to CPLR 7511(b)(1)(iii) (see generally Matter of New York City Tr. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 2:57 am
New York City Tr. [read post]
19 Feb 2010, 4:20 am
Using a CBA provision allowing an arbitrator to impose a different penalty than is otherwise mandated by the CBA is for the arbitrator to decideMatter of New York City Tr. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 4:54 am
Auth., 67 NY2d 219, 228 [1986]; see Edmonds v City of Yonkers, 294 AD2d 330 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 612 [2002]). [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 10:06 am
"Once this showing has been made . . . the burden shifts to the party opposing the motion for summary judgment to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to establish the existence of material issues of fact which require a trial of the action" (id.; see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 10:06 am
"Once this showing has been made . . . the burden shifts to the party opposing the motion for summary judgment to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to establish the existence of material issues of fact which require a trial of the action" (id.; see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). [read post]
4 Sep 2009, 5:25 am
New York City Tr. [read post]
12 Aug 2009, 9:00 am
New York City Tr. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 8:04 pm
Co.], 43 AD3d 1439, 1439, quoting Matter of New York City Tr. [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 4:18 am
Realty Corp., 28 AD3d 434; Golba v City of New York, 27 AD3d 524; Tejada v Jonas, 17 AD3d 448). [read post]
20 May 2009, 4:00 am
Law in effect at the time litigation was initiated applies notwithstanding a subsequent amendment liberalizing such lawBarnum v New York City Tr. [read post]
14 May 2009, 9:00 am
New York City Tr. [read post]
20 Feb 2009, 3:43 am
Home Care v New York State Dept. of Health, 5 NY3d at 506). [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 8:41 pm
Matter of Transport Workers Union Local 100, v New York City Tr. [read post]
