Search for: "People v Haug"
Results 1 - 8
of 8
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Aug 2022, 5:05 am
" Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the Appellate Division explained that "[T]he substantial evidence standard is a minimal standard" that is "less than a preponderance of the evidence, and demands only that a given inference is reasonable and plausible, not necessarily the most probable. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 5:05 am
" Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the Appellate Division explained that "[T]he substantial evidence standard is a minimal standard" that is "less than a preponderance of the evidence, and demands only that a given inference is reasonable and plausible, not necessarily the most probable. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 4:00 am
"As to considering hearsay evidence in an administrative hearing, the Appellate Division said that "hearsay is admissible as competent evidence in an administrative proceeding, and if sufficiently relevant and probative may constitute substantial evidence even if contradicted by live testimony on credibility grounds" [see Matter of Watson v New York State Justice Ctr. for the Protection of People with Special Needs, 152 AD3d 1025]. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 4:00 am
"As to considering hearsay evidence in an administrative hearing, the Appellate Division said that "hearsay is admissible as competent evidence in an administrative proceeding, and if sufficiently relevant and probative may constitute substantial evidence even if contradicted by live testimony on credibility grounds" [see Matter of Watson v New York State Justice Ctr. for the Protection of People with Special Needs, 152 AD3d 1025]. [read post]
16 Apr 2014, 5:30 am
Abdel Wahab eds., The Hauge: Eleven International, 2012) [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 8:50 am
” People v. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 12:47 am
Supreme Court's 2006 eBay v. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 2:47 pm
College of American Pathologists, 170 F.3d 53, 55 (1st Cir. 1999) (complaint must plead a “factual predicate concrete enough to warrant further proceedings” as “the price of entry, even to discovery”); George Haug Co. v. [read post]
