Search for: "APPLICATION OF THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY FOR ACCESS TO CERTAIN SEALED COURT RECORDS"
Results 1 - 20
of 32
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Apr 2014, 9:58 am
Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2014, 5:56 am
’ In re Application of New York Times Co. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 4:00 am
The pictured courthouse in Mineola, New York, is home to the three judges of the Commercial Division of the Nassau County Supreme Court. [read post]
7 Jul 2017, 2:00 am
Examples of this type of data include pleadings filed in court (except for matters under seal, which are rare) and documents filed with most government agencies such as the SEC or UK Companies House. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 4:13 am
FOIA is premised upon a wholly different principle, that government records should be accessible to any member of the public, i.e., the public at large, without any showing of need.[5] Thus, at its core, FOIA effectuates “the abstract public interest in open government. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 1:34 am
Source: New York Legislative Retrieval System (LRS), Search run July 19, 2009. [read post]
10 Dec 2019, 4:50 pm
New York the Supreme Court imposed heightened standards for this type of snooping, explaining that “authorization of eavesdropping for a two-month period is the equivalent of a series of intrusions, searches, and seizures pursuant to a single showing of probable cause. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 12:34 am
Superfund Case Tests if Law Firm Can Seal Affidavit Supporting Fee Application New Jersey Law Journal A multimillion-dollar fee fight in a Superfund case is testing whether a firm can file a secret affidavit supporting its fee application, so as to keep its special billing practices from the eyes of competitors in the environmental bar. [read post]
3 May 2017, 5:02 am
It is, needless to say, the responsibility of counsel to make such a motion in timely fashion and to show good cause for the requested sealing. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 3:50 pm
The new bill also follows in the footsteps of similar legislation in San Francisco, New York City, Philadelphia (stayed pending legal challenge), Delaware, Puerto Rico, Oregon and Massachusetts. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 3:50 pm
The new bill also follows in the footsteps of similar legislation in San Francisco, New York City, Philadelphia (stayed pending legal challenge), Delaware, Puerto Rico, Oregon and Massachusetts. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 3:00 am
The order turned aside Trump’s request to block the records’ release while the case regarding his assertion of executive privilege continues through the courts. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 9:52 pm
Grimm, of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Maryland, who oversees class action litigation arising out of last year’s data breach of Marriott’s Starwood guest reservation database. [read post]
24 Mar 2016, 11:04 am
That said, a judge could determine that “necessity” under the New York Telephone Company test should require the government to be certain no other federal agency can accomplish the task. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 4:43 pm
Judge Binns-Ward’s consolation prize is that the media could bring a court application for access – an expensive and slow process. [read post]
22 Sep 2023, 4:00 am
DNyuz – Rick Rojas (New York Times) | Published: 9/14/2023 When Gov. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am
The SCA generally prohibits disclosure to federal or state governments of certain email messages and metadata, but this prohibition yields to U.S. court orders that meet the following criteria: “A court order for disclosure . . . shall issue only if the governmental entity [seeking the order] offers specific and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the contents of a wire or electronic communication, or the… [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 4:26 pm
Frustrated by Apple’s refusal to create the new iOS, the government sought and obtained a court order from U.S. [read post]
1 Feb 2021, 11:26 am
New York,388 U.S. 41, 47, 87 S.Ct. 1873, 18 L.Ed.2d 1040 (1967). [read post]
31 Dec 2012, 3:29 pm
The Nevada Supreme Court recognized for the first time (although implicitly) that restrictive covenants may be enforceable against independent contractors. [read post]
