Search for: "Massachusetts v. New York" Results 1 - 20 of 1,422
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Feb 2008, 2:44 pm
Thanks to this recent New York Divorce and Family Law Blog post for reporting on the recent New York Appellate Division (intermediate level state appellate court) case of Martinez v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 7:15 am by Ruthann Robson
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law In its unanimous opinion in Commonwealth v. [read post]
7 Sep 2017, 9:00 am by Joe Hodnicki
From the text of the complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief: The States of New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Connecticut, Delaware, District Of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia (the “States”) bring this action to protect the States—including their residents, employers, regulatory systems, and educational institutions—against the illegal… [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 3:04 pm by WIMS
The States petitioning for review here (New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts) claim standing on the ground that nuclear power plants are within or near their borders and that an accident at one of these plants could harm their citizens.The States on appeal contended that the risk of a spent fuel pool fire must be a Category II rather than a Category I risk, because the risk is affected by mitigation that varies from plant to plant. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 9:00 am by Jason M. Knott
But not always, as the New York Court of Appeals held earlier this month in Brown & Brown, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 5:14 pm by Ruthann Robson
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law In a very brief order in Zogenix v. [read post]
28 Dec 2005, 8:14 am
"New York's decision follows similar rulings in other states, including Connecticut (Delahunty v. [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 5:07 pm by Ruthann Robson
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law In its unanimous opinion today in Commonwealth v. [read post]
17 Apr 2008, 3:52 am
Lindor's request for documents on MediaSentry's licensing in New York, and asked the Judge to disregard the cease and desist order issued by the Massachusetts state police.April 17, 2008, Letter of Richard L. [read post]
20 Sep 2016, 11:27 am by John C. Manoog III
The plaintiffs admitted that the defendant’s principal place of business was in Massachusetts but pointed out that the defendant was authorized to do business in New York and had a registered agent for service of process in New York. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 2:35 pm by Ruthann Robson
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law A unanimous Court, albeit in separate opinions, found the Massachusetts statute imposing a 35 foot buffer zone around places where abortions are performed violates the First Amendment in... [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 4:00 am by Steve McConnell
Oliver Wendell Holmes was on the Massachusetts bench, and New York had Cardozo. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 4:11 am
Massachusetts 07-591, that crime laboratory reports may not be used against criminal defendants at trial unless the analysts responsible for creating them give testimony and subject themselves to cross-examination, See text discussion in   June 26, 2009 New York Times article by Adam Liptak at: [www.nytimes.com]   [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 12:46 pm by Ruthann Robson
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in McCullen v. [read post]
11 Nov 2008, 5:02 pm
"Court Weighs How Juries Should Hear Lab Evidence," is Adam Liptak's report in today's New York Times.The Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in a case that could have broad implications for how prosecutors present evidence from crime laboratories at trial. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 8:43 pm
The New York Times reports today that the White House  told the EPA that it would simply not open emails detailing the agency's response to the Supreme Court's decision in Massachusetts v. [read post]