Search for: "Melvin v State of New York" Results 1 - 20 of 67
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 May 2015, 5:29 pm by Ruthann Robson
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law In its opinion in United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 3:20 am by Peter Mahler
Under “clear law in the State of New York,” Justice Schweitzer wrote, the doctrine of res judicata bars a plaintiff from “re-litigat[ing] against an agent the issues the parties already litigated and lost against the principal. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 9:43 am
Under a New York Appellate Division court decision issued March 26, 2013, virtually all hotel management agreements are now terminable at will by owners. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 9:00 am by Karen Tani
New York: Every Idea an Incitement (University Press of Kansas, 2012) and Melvin I. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 3:30 am by Peter Mahler
Internal Revenue Code or minority shareholder rights under New York’s Business Corporation Law although, to be fair, neither of those laws (or country or state for that matter) existed in his time. [read post]
3 Nov 2021, 9:30 pm by ernst
Knowles teaches political science at Oswego State University of New York. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 4:25 am
Court rules that the appointing authority made its appointments consistent with the requirements of Section 61.1 of the Civil Service Law Cherry v New York State Civ. [read post]
14 Oct 2013, 3:32 am by Peter Mahler
Fast forward to 2008, when New York’s highest court construed RLPA § 121-1102(d) in Appleton Acquisition, LLC v. [read post]
13 Nov 2016, 6:13 am by Brooke
In The New York Times Douglas Brinkley reviews Peter Cozzens' The Earth Is Weeping: The Epic Story of the Indian Wars for the American West. [read post]
13 Feb 2016, 6:08 am by Mark S. Humphreys
Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York brought an interpleader action to determine the proper beneficiary under a policy of life insurance issued on the life of Melvin K. [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 11:15 am
Court rules that the appointing authority made its appointments consistent with the requirements of Section 61.1 of the Civil Service LawMatter of Cherry v New York State Civ. [read post]