Search for: "Matter of Whitney v Whitney" Results 21 - 40 of 144
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Sep 2023, 5:29 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Eshaghian v Dorsey & Whitney LLP 2023 NY Slip Op 33102(U) September 6, 2023Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 154087/2020Judge: Shlomo S. [read post]
30 Jun 2008, 5:51 pm
Reversed.In In the Matter of A.T.; Lake County Dept. of Child Services v. [read post]
3 Dec 2007, 3:23 am
"Manhattan federal judge has delivered a lengthy manifesto against declining civility in the legal profession in the course of sanctioning law firm Dorsey & Whitney and two of its partners. [read post]
29 Jan 2009, 5:41 am
Preserving Privilege: A Timely Reminder for 10-K Season The recent federal district court decision in Roth v. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 8:37 am by Steven Cohen
Facts:  This case (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Exemptions are construed "narrowly, and an agency has the burden of demonstrating that an exemption applies 'by articulating a particularized and specific justification for denying access'" (Matter of Kosmider v Whitney, 34 NY3d 48, 54, quoting Matter of Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, 566; see Matter of Abdur-Rashid v New York City Police Dept., 31 NY3d 217, 225). [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Exemptions are construed "narrowly, and an agency has the burden of demonstrating that an exemption applies 'by articulating a particularized and specific justification for denying access'" (Matter of Kosmider v Whitney, 34 NY3d 48, 54, quoting Matter of Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, 566; see Matter of Abdur-Rashid v New York City Police Dept., 31 NY3d 217, 225). [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 4:08 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
RRG, 110 AD3d 783, 784; see Whitney v Whitney, 57 NY2d 731, 732; DAIJ, Inc. v Roth, 85 AD3d 959, 959). [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 2:00 am
  Justice Harris followed Machado v. [read post]