Search for: "STATE v. STOUT" Results 81 - 100 of 143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Sep 2020, 8:30 am by Tia Sewell, Anna Salvatore
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s Sept. 2 decision on United States v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 11:06 am by Mark S. Humphreys
That question was answered in 1936, by the Beaumont Court of Appeals in the case, Love et al. v. [read post]
24 Nov 2017, 8:30 am by Melissa Milewski
Here is a brief excerpt from the archival record of the case:"City of Harrodsburg v. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 5:53 am by Jim von der Heydt
 I also proposed that there is an enormous amount of work to do to understand the nature of Justice Roberts' restraint in NFIB v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 4:28 am
§75.4 sets different statutes of limitations for state employees designated managerial or confidential pursuant to Article 14 of the Civil Service Law than it does for other individuals. [read post]
9 Aug 2014, 11:14 pm
“[I]n such case it is the law of [the state where the mortal blow is given] that is violated, and not the law of the state where death may happen to occur” (Stout v. [read post]
5 Nov 2010, 3:23 am by Michael Fitzgibbon
It is only in exceptional circumstances that an arbitrator may order costs, see Community Addiction and Mental Health Services of Haldimand-Norfolk v. [read post]
15 May 2023, 1:53 am by INFORRM
On 10 May 2023, the Court of Appeal (Peter Jackson, Males and Arnold LJJ) heard an appeal in the case of Stoute v News Group Newspapers Ltd. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
The court noted that in Gomez v Stout, 13 NY3d 182, the Court of Appeals interpreted Civil Service Law §7 (2) to "require that the power to discipline be delegated, if necessary, with the governmental department's chain of command…. [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 2:49 am
There's a fairly stout file floating around with the word BUD on the spine]. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 5:46 am by Daniel E. Cummins
That open question was answered this past year on July 25 when the state Superior Court handed down its opinion in the post- Koken case of Sehl v. [read post]