Search for: "3 NY3d 1"
Results 161 - 180
of 663
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
" Specifically, the City argued that RSSL §513(h) [1] "addresses the issue of service credit for [childcare] leave," [2] overrides any like provision of Administrative Code §13-218, and [3] "limits the eligibility for such credit to New York City correction officers hired before April 1, 2012. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
" Specifically, the City argued that RSSL §513(h) [1] "addresses the issue of service credit for [childcare] leave," [2] overrides any like provision of Administrative Code §13-218, and [3] "limits the eligibility for such credit to New York City correction officers hired before April 1, 2012. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 11:43 am
Co. v Mallela, 4 NY3d 313 [2005]). [read post]
18 May 2021, 4:00 am
Supreme Court granted Plaintiff's petition, holding that both Education Law §§2510(3)(a) and 3013(3)(a) applied under the circumstances. [read post]
18 May 2021, 4:00 am
Supreme Court granted Plaintiff's petition, holding that both Education Law §§2510(3)(a) and 3013(3)(a) applied under the circumstances. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 3:59 am
at 50 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Dombrowski v Bulson, 19 NY3d 347, 350; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 434). [read post]
23 May 2018, 3:59 am
at 50 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Dombrowski v Bulson, 19 NY3d 347, 350 [2012]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 434 [2007]). [read post]
1 Jul 2008, 3:27 am
The building, however, was legally a three-family dwelling, and the construction project during which the plaintiff was injured did not change the legal occupancy of the dwelling.Defendants argument that the one- or two-family dwelling exception applied to three-family dwellings that are only occupied by a single family was based on Stejskal v Simons, 3 NY3d 628, 629, 816 N.E.2d 186, 782 N.Y.S.2d 397 and Khela v Neiger, 85 NY2d 333, 648 N.E.2d 1329 (1995) which had held that the… [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 5:31 pm
Co., 1 NY3d at 69). [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
DOWLING HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ. 2021-02862 (Index No. 607383/20) [*1]In the Matter of Scott Lockwood, appellant, vCounty of Suffolk, et al., respondents. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
DOWLING HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ. 2021-02862 (Index No. 607383/20) [*1]In the Matter of Scott Lockwood, appellant, vCounty of Suffolk, et al., respondents. [read post]
11 Sep 2022, 2:40 am
Here is the doctrinal take-away discussion on Judiciary Law § 487: “The statute of limitations is also six years for plaintiffs’ first cause of action for violation of Judiciary Law § 487 (see CPLR § 213 [ 1]; Melcher v Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 23 NY3d 10, 15 [2014], rearg denied 23 NY3d 998 [2014]). [read post]
21 Nov 2017, 4:07 am
.], 3 NY3d 538, 539; 730 J & J, LLC v Polizzotto & Polizzotto, Esqs., 69 AD3d 704, 705). [read post]
21 Sep 2018, 8:33 am
" Fischbarg v Doucet, 9 NY3d 375, 380 (2007) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).a. [read post]
10 May 2023, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division explained that; 1. [read post]
10 May 2023, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division explained that; 1. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 4:23 am
Here, contrary to the defendants’ contention, the plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded a cause of action alleging breach of contract (see De Guaman v American Hope [*3]Group, 163 AD3d at 917). [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 3:28 am
In this seminar, Labor Law/Construction Site Accidents in New York, presented by the New York State Bar association on December 9, 2011 Gair discusses section 240(1) cases including Runner v New York Stock Exch., Inc. (13 NY3d 599, [2009]), Salazar v.Novalex Contracting Corp., et al., decided by The Court of Appeals on November 21, 2011, 2011 NY Slip Op 8446 and Wilinski v. 334 East 92nd Housing Development Fund Corp., et al., decided October 25, 2011, 2011 NY Slip Op 7477 among… [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 7:48 pm
Specifically, Backus appealed from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of two counts of vehicular assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.03 [1]) and one count of driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [3]), and sentencing him to two one-year concurrent definite terms for vehicular assault, and a one-year definite term for driving while intoxicated, to be served consecutively. [read post]
24 May 2019, 4:36 am
at 3). [read post]
