Search for: "Hankin v. Hankin"
Results 21 - 40
of 56
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Feb 2010, 2:26 am
The Appellate Division ruled that Hankin attempted to use the subpoena duces tecum improperly and such a subpoena "may not be used for purposes of discovery or to ascertain the existence of evidence" [Board of Educ. of City of New York v Hankins 294 A.D.2d 360].** Sometimes an individual served with disciplinary charges will demand "a bill of particulars" requiring the appointing authority to set out the charges and specifications filed against the… [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 4:15 am
The Appellate Division ruled that Hankin attempted to use the subpoena duces tecum improperly and such a subpoena "may not be used for purposes of discovery or to ascertain the existence of evidence" [Board of Educ. of City of New York v Hankins 294 A.D.2d 360].Sometimes an individual served with disciplinary charges will demand "a bill of particulars" requiring the appointing authority to set out the charges and specifications filed against the… [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 11:16 pm
A few district courts had rejected the argument, see Hankins v. [read post]
15 Oct 2007, 1:20 am
DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKBankruptcy
Minister's Age Discrimination Suit Dismissed; Action Would Breach Religious Freedom and Restoration Act
Hankins v. [read post]
29 Sep 2010, 3:01 am
In Reynolds v Ross, Suchoff, Hankin, Maidenbaum, Handwerker & Mazel, P.C Justice Gische has to choose between two opposing narratives. [read post]
12 Sep 2010, 10:13 am
LEXIS 92743 (WD PA, Sept. 7, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (Hankins v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 5:54 pm
Hankins. [read post]
5 May 2010, 3:00 am
Hankins, [41 S.W. 1028, 1030 (Tenn. 1897)]; Chambers v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 6:00 am
” Boykin, 445 So. 2d at 538-39; see also Hankins v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 6:00 am
” Boykin, 445 So. 2d at 538-39; see also Hankins v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 6:00 am
” Boykin, 445 So. 2d at 538-39; see also Hankins v. [read post]
7 Oct 2019, 2:01 pm
Hankins v. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 2:13 pm
Hankins v. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 3:59 pm
Hankins (2003). [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 7:55 am
Hankins, 63 N.C. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 7:55 am
Hankins, 63 N.C. [read post]
29 May 2012, 2:56 pm
Council v. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 1:53 am
Under the classic 1955 tort case Garratt v. [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 7:54 pm
Miller v. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 1:03 pm
Ross, Suchoff, Egert, Hankin, Maidenbaum & Mazel, P.C., No. 96 CIV. 1756 (LAP), 1997 WL 171011, *6 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]