Search for: "Mai v. City of Garden City" Results 241 - 260 of 456
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Mar 2015, 8:51 am by WIMS
 Appeals Court Environmental Decisions <> Alfonso Rodriguez v. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 5:14 am by Richard Altieri, Margaret Taylor
The president’s message a few hours later in an address to the public from the Rose Garden was milder but echoed the same themes. [read post]
28 Oct 2012, 2:52 pm by Nathaniel Baca
The local law enforcement agency may set forth how often such copies shall be provided to it. [read post]
28 Oct 2012, 2:52 pm by Nathaniel Baca
The local law enforcement agency may set forth how often such copies shall be provided to it. [read post]
Instead, it held that the proper question was whether there was “substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the project may have a significant effect on the environment or may exacerbate existing environmental hazards. [read post]
Instead, it held that the proper question was whether there was “substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the project may have a significant effect on the environment or may exacerbate existing environmental hazards. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 2:13 pm by Eugene Volokh
While Razzano had been away, a member of McCarthy’s staff had called the Garden City Police regarding his visit, and the Garden City Police contacted the Nassau County Police Department Special Investigations Squad. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 8:51 am by admin
  Nearly 40 years ago the Garden State borrowed $302 million to begin constructing the Meadowlands. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 1:22 pm by Neil Cahn
Amy Cobert Haber, of Cobert Haber & Haber, of Garden City, represented the ex-husband. [read post]
23 Feb 2018, 4:07 am by Edith Roberts
Charlotte Garden analyzes the opinion for this blog. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 9:01 am by Neil Cahn
Schecter & Associates, P.C., of Garden City, represented the father. [read post]
Instead, it held that the proper question was whether there was “substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the project may have a significant effect on the environment or may exacerbate existing environmental hazards. [read post]
Instead, it held that the proper question was whether there was “substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the project may have a significant effect on the environment or may exacerbate existing environmental hazards. [read post]