Search for: "State v. Hearst"
Results 21 - 40
of 167
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2009, 4:00 am
Hearst Communications, Inc. v. [read post]
10 May 2013, 11:49 am
Judge Harold Baer, Jr. denied class certification (and denied summary judgment) for the interns, relying largely on Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 8:26 pm
Hearst Corp. [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 9:46 am
Hearst v. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 12:19 am
School Dist. 162 Misc.2d 300, affd, 221 A.D.2d 1028].On the other hand, in LaRocca v. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 5:19 pm
" In Hamdi v Rumsfeld, the United States Supreme Court acknowledged that there is a tension "between the autonomy that the Government asserts is necessary in order to pursue effectively a particular goal and the process that a citizen contends he is due before he is deprived of a constitutional right as held in Mathews v Eldridge. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 6:27 am
Hearst Stations, Inc. dba WTAE-TV , November 18, 2016, Eddy, C.). [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 4:15 am
School Dist. 162 Misc.2d 300, affd, 221 A.D.2d 1028].On the other hand, in LaRocca v. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:24 pm
As stated in the dissent to Kalin, the criminal court of the State of New York must continue to ensure that such prosecutions do not become routinized or treated as insignificant or unimportant. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 5:30 am
Assn. v. [read post]
8 Aug 2016, 11:08 am
Case citation: Despot v. [read post]
18 May 2007, 7:10 am
"[Insert your own punchline here.]For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Hearst v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 7:53 am
Hearst Corp. (2d Cir. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 8:08 am
Earlier this week, in a case styled Halaburda v. [read post]
13 Jan 2018, 8:00 pm
Hearst Corp. (1969) 276 Cal.App.2d 680, where the plaintiff alleged that defective shoes caused her injuries. [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 9:32 pm
Finally, " 'in order to prevent [the amended] judgment which is unreviewable for mootness from spawning any legal consequences or precedent,' " we vacate the amended judgment (Matter of Thrall v CNY Centro, Inc., 89 AD3d 1449, 1451 [4th Dept 2011], lv dismissed 19 NY3d 898 [2012], quoting Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 718 [1980]; see Funderburke v New York State Dept. of Civ. [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 9:32 pm
Finally, " 'in order to prevent [the amended] judgment which is unreviewable for mootness from spawning any legal consequences or precedent,' " we vacate the amended judgment (Matter of Thrall v CNY Centro, Inc., 89 AD3d 1449, 1451 [4th Dept 2011], lv dismissed 19 NY3d 898 [2012], quoting Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 718 [1980]; see Funderburke v New York State Dept. of Civ. [read post]
21 May 2019, 4:00 am
"** Claims of exception to the mootness doctrine typically require the court to consider three issues: [a] is the question presented of a substantial public nature; [b] is there is a need for an authoritative determination for the future guidance of public officers; and [3] is there a likelihood of future recurrence of the question [see Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707].The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2019/2019_03858.htm [read post]
21 May 2019, 4:00 am
"** Claims of exception to the mootness doctrine typically require the court to consider three issues: [a] is the question presented of a substantial public nature; [b] is there is a need for an authoritative determination for the future guidance of public officers; and [3] is there a likelihood of future recurrence of the question [see Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707].The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2019/2019_03858.htm [read post]
