Search for: "Garcia v. Garcia" Results 1 - 20 of 2,147
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jun 2022, 3:50 am by Kyle Hulehan
Recent research by economists Javier Garcia-Bernardo, Petr Janský, and Gabriel Zucman shows the driving force behind a reduction in the share of profits that U.S. companies book abroad was repatriations of IP.[10] As trends continue to develop, U.S. policymakers should study them to understand how the TCJA reforms affect the taxes paid by U.S. multinationals, the destination for U.S. outbound investment, and the location of IP. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm by Public Employment Law Press
" In light of the foregoing, and given that no contrary medical opinions were presented, the Board's factual determination that claimant suffered from an occupational disease resulting from repetitive stress is supported by substantial evidence and will not be disturbed (see Matter of Garcia v MCI Interiors, Inc., 158 AD3d 907, 908 [2018]; Matter of Curtis v Xerox, 66 AD3d 1106, 1108 [2009]). [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm by Public Employment Law Press
" In light of the foregoing, and given that no contrary medical opinions were presented, the Board's factual determination that claimant suffered from an occupational disease resulting from repetitive stress is supported by substantial evidence and will not be disturbed (see Matter of Garcia v MCI Interiors, Inc., 158 AD3d 907, 908 [2018]; Matter of Curtis v Xerox, 66 AD3d 1106, 1108 [2009]). [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 9:45 am by Paul Levy
Although this reasoning did not appear in the later opinion explaining the court’s decision more fully, the en banc court Ninth Circuit in Garcia v. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am by Public Employment Law Press
(UAW) v Yard-Man, Inc. (716 F2d 1476 [6th Cir 1983], cert denied 465 US 1007 [1984]) and its progeny. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am by Public Employment Law Press
(UAW) v Yard-Man, Inc. (716 F2d 1476 [6th Cir 1983], cert denied 465 US 1007 [1984]) and its progeny. [read post]
1 Mar 2022, 8:00 pm
Both the Appellate Term and the Appellate Division affirmed, but the Court of Appeals ultimately reversed.Judge Michael Garcia, who wrote the majority opinion for the Court of Appeals, noted that because a purchase of rights had removed the unit from rent regulation under the Loft Law, the unit could not be subject to rent stabilization or afforded eviction protections. [read post]
1 Mar 2022, 8:00 pm
Both the Appellate Term and the Appellate Division affirmed, but the Court of Appeals ultimately reversed.Judge Michael Garcia, who wrote the majority opinion for the Court of Appeals, noted that because a purchase of rights had removed the unit from rent regulation under the Loft Law, the unit could not be subject to rent stabilization or afforded eviction protections. [read post]