Search for: "Snow v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 830
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Aug 2021, 3:09 am
Lest we forget the snow and ice of winter, here on a lovely August morning, Bianco v Law Offs. of Yuri Prakhin 2020 NY Slip Op 07849 [189 AD3d 1326] December 23, 2020 Appellate Division, Second Department brings back the slippery chilly days of January. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 9:56 am
’ Fuller v. [read post]
7 Jan 2010, 7:45 am
In Dumas v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 5:18 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 6:03 am
As Massachusetts is one of the few states that makes snow clearing a requirement, you may be able to establish per se negligence. [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 12:13 pm
The case is Papadopoulos v. [read post]
30 May 2022, 5:00 am
In the case of Mertira v. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 10:28 am
Additional Resources: Budzko v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 11:21 am
The state's high court changed the longstanding law so it falls in line with other states. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 1:47 pm
Calling the distinction between natural and unnatural accumulations of ice and snow a "relic" derived from old cases, which "has sown confusion and conflict in our case law," the Court in Papadopoulos v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 7:28 am
Tayar v. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 12:00 pm
Citing Ryan v. [read post]
1 May 2015, 11:16 am
District Judge Murray Snow held four days of contempt hearings in the civil rights class action known as Melendres v. [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 12:15 pm
The question arose in Moore v. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 3:50 pm
Until as recently as 2010, Massachusetts state law provided an exception to this general principle when it came to snow and ice. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 5:42 am
The Court determined that the response invaded the province of the jury.The Court stated the instant case was nothing like Heywood v. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 8:10 am
In Whitney v. [read post]
25 Nov 2021, 8:56 am
The state appealed but in Killenberger v. [read post]
17 Jan 2011, 4:11 pm
In Papadopoulos v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 12:57 pm
The ruling in Pattullo-Banks v. [read post]
