Search for: "State v. Silvas"
Results 161 - 180
of 349
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Apr 2012, 8:04 am
Carter, Jr. upheld Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck’s order in Da Silva Moore, et. al. v. [read post]
22 Oct 2022, 10:33 am
He emphasized that after “[v]erifying that that content has been repeated, there will be no need for a new representation or judicial decision, there will be an extension and immediate withdrawal of these fraudulent news. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 3:34 am
As Annsley explains in this post, that litigation started back in 2012 and focuses on an exciting Rovi's patent - European Patent (UK) No 0, 862,833 - which relates to interactive video communications and viewer-controlled selection of programming information.* Jeremy Phillips' words of warning- and some further thoughtsStarting from Jeremy's words at the 10th anniversary JIPLP program, Neil reflects on the state of IP in the universities. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 11:57 am
District Court for the Southern District of New York approved the use of predictive coding in Monique Da Silva Moore, et al. v. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 3:03 am
While the DeCaro defendants contend that a rescission defense based on unilateral mistake would not have been successful in the underlying action for specific performance, specific performance may be denied based on unilateral mistake [*4]where the other party must have been aware of the mistake (see Da Silva v Musso, 53 NY2d 543, 548; Sheridan Drive-In v State of New York, 16 AD2d 400, 405; Harper, Inc. v City of Newburgh, 159 App Div 695, 696-697). [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 4:22 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 6:01 pm
Peck, United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of New York, issued an opinion and order (order) on February 24th in Da Silva Moore v. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 10:52 pm
Village of Port Chester - "conspicuous mention" of time limitations in eminent domain Silva v. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 8:46 am
Silva (1931) 116 Cal.App. 1). [read post]
3 Mar 2016, 5:19 am
See Larkin v. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 8:08 pm
A prompt, thorough, and fair investigation conducted in good faith can insulate an employer from liability for wrongful termination (see Cotran v Rollins Hudig Hall Int’l, Inc. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 93; Silva v Lucky Stores, Inc. (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 256, improve employee morale, and prevent further harassment or discrimination from occurring. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 7:08 pm
A prompt, thorough, and fair investigation conducted in good faith can insulate an employer from liability for wrongful termination (see Cotran v Rollins Hudig Hall Int’l, Inc. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 93; Silva v Lucky Stores, Inc. (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 256, improve employee morale, and prevent further harassment or discrimination from occurring. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 7:08 pm
A prompt, thorough, and fair investigation conducted in good faith can insulate an employer from liability for wrongful termination (see Cotran v Rollins Hudig Hall Int’l, Inc. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 93; Silva v Lucky Stores, Inc. (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 256, improve employee morale, and prevent further harassment or discrimination from occurring. [read post]
18 Feb 2015, 3:41 pm
A recent case, Kennestone Hospital, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
A showing of "good cause" generally requires intentional wrongdoing or, at least, a showing that petitioners were aggrieved or prejudiced by the violation (see Matter of Fichera v New York State Dept. of Envtl. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
A showing of "good cause" generally requires intentional wrongdoing or, at least, a showing that petitioners were aggrieved or prejudiced by the violation (see Matter of Fichera v New York State Dept. of Envtl. [read post]
3 Aug 2018, 6:00 am
R (DA & Ors) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (expedited) was heard on 17 until 19 July 2018. [read post]
27 May 2012, 6:57 am
" Silva v. [read post]
15 May 2011, 8:05 am
He raised religious issues only after he was cited for other infractions of TC rules.In Calderon-Silva v. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 8:09 am
Lord Kerr noted in particular that the de Silva review had expressed doubt as to the role of state agents and concluded that that doubt was sufficient to warrant further investigation. [read post]
