Search for: "Matter of Sincere M. v State of New York" Results 1 - 20 of 72
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2023, 1:13 pm by Robert George
Saturday's New York Times headlines include: 1) "Justices Say No to Student Debt Relief" and 2) "Web Designer Wins Right to Turn Away Gay People" Both headlines are grotesque distortions if not outright falsehoods. [read post]
3 Feb 2023, 6:20 am by Jeff Welty
The New York Times story about Tyre Nichols’ funeral is here. [read post]
25 May 2017, 9:37 am by Eugene Volokh
But as I read New York state and New York City statutes, they (like federal law) require religious accommodation in employment but not in public accommodations; Jalal remains free to sue in state court based on those statutes, but I doubt that she would win. [read post]
7 Sep 2008, 7:31 am
Rosenblatt, a retired judge who is president of the Historical Society of the Courts of the State of New York. [read post]
16 Apr 2022, 9:43 am by Venkat Balasubramani
The court says that either New York or California law governs, and the result would be the same under either state’s law. [read post]
27 Dec 2012, 12:31 am
 The author, Thomas M. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 6:01 am by Terry Hart
The Southern District Court of New York ruled in favor of a YouTube duo (Ethan and Hila Klein, who release videos under the moniker H3H3) facing a claim of copyright infringement for a “reaction video” on August 23, holding that their use of clips from plaintiff’s video constituted fair use. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 9:17 am by Eugene Volokh
(Matter of Congregation B’Nai Jonah v Kuriansky, 172 AD2d 35, 38-39 [3d Dept 1991]). [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 2:30 pm by Joel R. Brandes
Brandes, titled" Stare Decisis, Precedent and Dicta, appears in the March 2020 issue of the New York State Bar Journal, Vol.92, No. 2 at page 36. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 5:00 pm by McNabb Associates, P.C.
It was Ratified by the President of the United States of America on December 12, 1975. [read post]
24 May 2012, 4:19 am
 Now suppose that a Catholic or other religious hospital in New York objects to making Social Security payments for some or even all of its employees on the ground that such payments will go to support Social Security disability and survivor benefits for the same-sex spouses of people married under New York law, and thus under federal law. [read post]