Search for: "DEROSA v. STATE"
Results 1 - 20
of 20
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jan 2013, 1:20 pm
In DeRosa v. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 5:00 am
DeRosa's]. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 4:00 am
Citing Matter of DeRosa v Dyster, 90 AD3d 1470, a case in which the collective bargaining agreement expressly permitted "grievances concerning retirement benefits" and expressly provided for health insurance benefits after retirement, the majority of DeRosa court held that because only an individual "employee" could file a grievance, DeRosa, a retired employee of City of Niagara Falls, could not have filed a grievance before commencing a CPLR… [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 6:03 am
On that form, DeRosa stated that he was “no longer able to speak on phone or work with computer [due] to pain. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 11:26 am
DeRosa as a defendant, and denied the Retos’ motion to remand the case to state court. [read post]
22 Jul 2007, 11:21 pm
In Robinson v. [read post]
17 Sep 2012, 4:42 am
DeRosa questioned the validity of Dr. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 5:00 am
For more on this test, and how it may apply in NJ, check out DeRosa v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 12:22 pm
DeRosa v. [read post]
29 Jan 2020, 1:18 am
” 750 ILCS 5/501(b); see also Wilson v. [read post]
11 Jun 2022, 12:26 pm
The complaint names as Defendants the New York State Police … former Governor Andrew Cuomo …, Melissa DeRosa …, and Richard Azzopardi …. [read post]
21 Sep 2024, 9:12 am
DeRosa, 2024 WL 1298001 (S.D. [read post]
14 Jan 2021, 5:57 pm
Constitutional law experts offer differing opinions on the impact of the case, Brandenburg v. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 8:41 am
DeRosa v. [read post]
14 Jan 2021, 3:29 pm
Constitutional law experts offer differing opinions on the impact of the case, Brandenburg v. [read post]
27 Jan 2021, 4:03 pm
Constitutional law experts offer differing opinions on the impact of the case, Brandenburg v. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 1:22 pm
Workman, 692 F.3d 1133 (10th Cir. 2012) (wrote opinion) “allowing petitioner’s brother to be questioned after invoking Fifth Amendment privilege was harmless error” DeRosa v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 5:17 am
In NFL v. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 7:41 pm
DeRosa, 413 Pa. 164, 196 A.2d 387, 389–90 (Pa. 1964) Menarde v. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 1:36 pm
’ paper by Graeme Clark SC (IP Down Under) Full Federal Court decision concerning brand reputation in context of ‘lookalike’ products and famous brands: Hansen Beverage Company v Bickfords (Australia) Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen Jaques) Federal Court holds that grace period applicable to a ‘parent patent’ is different to that of its divisional ‘child’: Mont Adventure Equipment v Phoenix Leisure Group (IP Down… [read post]
