Search for: "People v Pataki"
Results 1 - 20
of 76
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jun 2013, 5:00 pm
So, I thought I would summarize Pataky v. [read post]
15 May 2015, 7:13 am
He was granted parole in March 1999, but before plaintiff was able to leave prison, a series of phone calls took place between Governor Pataki's office and Board of Parole people in Albany. [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 5:43 pm
Pataki in 2005. *** Judge Cherished Opinions Standing Up for the ‘Little Guy’ In In re Golden, 56 AD3d 1109 (2008), Justice Cardona concluded that both common law and state Human Services Law permit transgendered individuals to legally assume a new name to reflect their new identification; in People v. [read post]
19 Feb 2013, 8:45 am
Supreme Court precedent, Zinermon v. [read post]
7 Jun 2007, 6:25 am
We shutter shudder to think how this case will develop.For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: People v. [read post]
12 May 2009, 8:37 pm
X appeals to the NY Court of Appeals, which ruled 4-3 today (People v. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 9:46 am
Godfrey v. [read post]
22 Sep 2023, 7:48 am
"The Second Circuit held years ago (Haley v. [read post]
18 Mar 2021, 9:34 am
Pataki Search Engines Defeat “Must-Carry” Lawsuit–Langdon v. [read post]
11 May 2016, 8:58 am
Case citation: Fakhrian v. [read post]
24 Nov 2013, 11:01 am
Pataki and People v. [read post]
4 May 2020, 7:23 am
Pataki Search Engines Defeat “Must-Carry” Lawsuit–Langdon v. [read post]
8 Dec 2013, 10:58 am
Pataki. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 4:17 pm
" People v Stuart, 100 NY2d 412, 422 (2003). [read post]
26 Aug 2023, 9:13 am
Pataki Search Engines Defeat “Must-Carry” Lawsuit–Langdon v. [read post]
8 May 2022, 10:02 am
Pataki Search Engines Defeat “Must-Carry” Lawsuit–Langdon v. [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 7:58 am
Bonus Coverage: We Are the People, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 2:07 pm
Doesn’t think we should change Roe v. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 6:50 am
Pataki Search Engines Defeat “Must-Carry” Lawsuit–Langdon v. [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 9:32 pm
Contrary to respondents' contention, the issue here is not likely to recur (see generally id. at 811-812; People v Rikers Is. [read post]
