Search for: "Berger v. Berger" Results 161 - 180 of 873
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jun 2012, 7:17 am by Schachtman
Berger, “The Admissibility of Expert Testimony 11, 24 n.62 in RMSE3d (“See Cook v. [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 3:08 pm
“This is a very bold step,” said Maryland Senate president Thomas V. [read post]
21 May 2017, 9:01 pm by Neil Cahn
So held the he Appellate Division, Third Department in its May 11, 2017 decision in Flikweert v. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 2:51 pm by Anthony Lake
The article states that, since 1997, federal courts have determined that Department of Justice attorneys violated laws or ethical rules in some 201 cases, including the duty expressed by Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland over 70 years ago in Berger v. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 5:00 am
Corporate litigators, I am sure, would never miss the fact that substantive rights mean little apart from the process through which they can be asserted, defended and elaborated in court (and by implication, in settlement negotiations). [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 3:00 am by Jeff Welty
The Court granted certiorari in City of Los Angeles v. [read post]
3 Mar 2017, 7:01 am by Jason M. Cover
”  In particular, it asked Secretary Mnuchin to address CFPB actions that are especially burdensome on credit unions, such as those related to: (i) unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices, (ii) debt collection, (iii) qualified mortgages, (iv) mortgage servicing; (v) consumer complaints, (vi) Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requirements, (vii) overdraft programs, (viii) payday lending rules, (ix) arbitration and (x) small entity exemptions. [read post]
20 May 2011, 3:01 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  ""The law in New York does not recognize any liability on the part of an attorney to a nonclient third party for injuries sustained as a result of an attorney's actions in representing his client absent fraud, collusion, or a malicious or tortious act" (Doo v Berger, 227 AD2d 435, 436 [1996]). [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 2:43 pm by Public BLAWG
 The Court distinguished the case factually from its recent decision in Berger v. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 10:59 am by Public Employment Law Press
Nor does the agreement demonstrate that the parties intended to arbitrate the claims of violation of wage provisions of the Labor Law asserted in the complaint (see Matter of Berger v New York University, __AD3d__, 2022 NY Slip Op 03313 [1st Dept 2022]; Hichez v United Jewish Council of the E. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 10:59 am by Public Employment Law Press
Nor does the agreement demonstrate that the parties intended to arbitrate the claims of violation of wage provisions of the Labor Law asserted in the complaint (see Matter of Berger v New York University, __AD3d__, 2022 NY Slip Op 03313 [1st Dept 2022]; Hichez v United Jewish Council of the E. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 10:59 am by Public Employment Law Press
Nor does the agreement demonstrate that the parties intended to arbitrate the claims of violation of wage provisions of the Labor Law asserted in the complaint (see Matter of Berger v New York University, __AD3d__, 2022 NY Slip Op 03313 [1st Dept 2022]; Hichez v United Jewish Council of the E. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 10:59 am by Public Employment Law Press
Nor does the agreement demonstrate that the parties intended to arbitrate the claims of violation of wage provisions of the Labor Law asserted in the complaint (see Matter of Berger v New York University, __AD3d__, 2022 NY Slip Op 03313 [1st Dept 2022]; Hichez v United Jewish Council of the E. [read post]