Search for: "State v. Hearst"
Results 1 - 20
of 167
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2013, 1:53 pm
Most notably, however, the court stated that immediate Second Circuit guidance on the issue “will significantly affect the conduct of other lawsuits now pending in the district courts which have relied on other legal standards or the same legal standard, but have come out differently,” specifically citing the decision in Glatt v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 2:53 pm
Most notably, however, the court stated that immediate Second Circuit guidance on the issue “will significantly affect the conduct of other lawsuits now pending in the district courts which have relied on other legal standards or the same legal standard, but have come out differently,” specifically citing the decision in Glatt v. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 5:14 pm
In People v Alejandro it was held that if both these factors are present, then the information states a prima facie case, and is sufficient. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 9:43 am
California State Council of Carpenters, 459 U.S. 519 (1983).[6] Blue Shield v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 12:37 pm
By Sean Kirby In Wang, et al. v. [read post]
26 Aug 2016, 7:24 am
Aside from its detailed discussion of the facts of the plaintiffs’ internships, the court’s decision, Wang v. [read post]
19 Sep 2008, 4:22 am
Matter of Humane Socy. of United States v Fanslau, 2008 NY Slip Op 06681, Decided on August 28, 2008, Appellate Division, Third Department In Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, the Court of Appeals said... [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 1:27 pm
An issue is moot when it may not properly be decided by this court unless it is found to be within the exception to the doctrine which permits the courts to preserve for review important and recurring issues which, by virtue of their relatively brief existence, would be rendered otherwise nonreviewable as held in Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne and Roe v Wade. [read post]
16 Feb 2013, 6:43 am
’ ” In re Grand Jury, 219 F.3d at 182 (quoting United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2011, 10:03 am
In Gray, III v. [read post]
2 Jun 2013, 9:19 pm
With an eye to the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc v Dukes, the court determined that the plaintiffs could not show anything more than a uniform policy by Hearst of utilizing unpaid internships. [read post]
26 Oct 2015, 4:00 am
Standards used by courts is evaluating the denial of a Freedom of Information request for public recordsHearst Corp. v New York State Police, 2015 NY Slip Op 07729, Appellate Division, Third Department The Hearst Corporation, publisher the Albany Times Union and one of its reporters, Brendon Lyons, [Hearst] submitted a request to the NYS Division of State Police [DSP] pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law [FOIL] for the disclosure of all… [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 7:03 am
Moreover, the United States Supreme Court had held, in Fong Foo v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 10:40 am
On July 2, 2015, in Glatt v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 10:40 am
On July 2, 2015, in Glatt v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 4:00 am
The “personnel records” exemption set out in Civil Rights Law §50-a (1) applies to both active and former employees of the agency Hearst Corp. v New York State Police, 2013 NY Slip Op 03900, Appellate Division, Third Department Supreme Court dismissed the Hearst Corporation’s [Hearst] appeal of an administrative decision denying its Freedom of Information [FOIL] request for “all records” maintained by the Division of… [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 4:59 am
The appeals court, in Wang v. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 4:04 pm
The case is titled Hearst Holdings, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2015, 8:27 am
Case citation: Martin v. [read post]
8 Jan 2017, 8:04 am
Group v Empire State Dev. [read post]
