Search for: "Darby v. State" Results 101 - 120 of 166
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2012, 4:33 pm by christopher
Becker SEE MY PREVIOUS POST CAMBRIDGE NIL GEORGIA STATE NIL A COPYRIGHT DARBY ANALYSIS Share on Facebook [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 3:27 am by Rick Hills
The most appropriate limit on Congress' enumerated powers was stated 193 years ago by Chief Justice John Marshall in McCulloch v. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 2:51 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
A client's "self-serving, bald allegations of oral protests [a]re insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to the existence of an account stated" (Darby & Darby v VSI Intl., 95 NY2d 308, 315 [2000]) The part of defendants' malpractice counterclaim that dealt with the action against Edward Roski III was properly dismissed. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 2:40 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Initially, it is noted that inasmuch as the Plaintiff has admitted that the Attorney Defendants' sole role in the transaction was to act as her closing attorney and to assist her in acquiring title to both properties, this Court finds that this transaction was a garden variety real estate transaction that does not require the Attorney Defendants on the instant motions to furnish expert affidavits to establish that they did not breach any standard of professional care (Darby &… [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 11:07 am by Randy Barnett
S. 606 et seq.; United States v. [read post]
14 Sep 2011, 4:25 am by Russ Bensing
”  This past summer, in State v. [read post]
5 Aug 2011, 11:38 am by Steven Schwinn - Guest
  In the Court’s most recent foray, in United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 4:59 pm by David Kopel
State spending on Medicaid has already become a huge share of state budgets, crowding out all sorts of discretionary spending. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 6:21 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Under these circumstances, we agree with Supreme Court that defendant's general claims of verbal refusals to pay did not constitute a specific objection sufficient to defeat plaintiff's cause of action for an account stated (see Darby & Darby v VSI Intl., 95 NY2d 308, 315 [2000]; J.B.H., Inc. v Godinez, 34 AD3d at 875-876; PPG Indus. v A.G.P. [read post]