Search for: "Boles v. State" Results 21 - 40 of 50
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2010, 1:18 pm by Tom Lamb
Prior to that, in May 2010, the second Fosamax MDL bellwether case (after Judge Keenan declared a mistrial in the first Boles case trial back in September 2009), Maley v. [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 12:50 pm by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 23848 (ED CA, March 15, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge concluded that inmates failed to state a claim against the California State Personnel Board in connection with their complaint that no Wiccan prison chaplains were hired for their facility.In Jackson v. [read post]
26 Sep 2018, 8:25 am by Robert Harper
That statutory silence led courts to conclude that exoneration clauses in inter vivos trust instruments generally were enforceable, except to the extent that they sought to excuse a trustee from liability for gross negligence, reckless indifference, self-dealing, or bad faith (see Matter of Tydings, 32 Misc3d 1204[A], at *6 [Sur Ct, Bronx County 2011]; Boles v Lanham, 55 AD3d 647, 648 [2d Dep’t 2008] [opining that a “trustee is liable if he or she commits a breach of… [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 1:42 pm by Bexis
Seems sort of basic, but every so often a case comes along that reminds us why this principle is important.In Boles v. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 12:39 pm by Bexis
In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation (Boles), 2010 WL 3955814 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 10:27 am by Andrew Hamm
” At Notice & Comment, David Rubenstein argues that United States v. [read post]