Search for: "State v. Hearst"
Results 81 - 100
of 167
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Feb 2021, 4:30 am
Accordingly, the Appellate Division concluded that Supreme Court should have granted those branches of the petition which sought to compel disclosure of the documents sought in Plaintiff's FOIL requests that were the subject of this appeal. * New York State Public Officers Law Article 6. ** See Matter of Data Tree, LLC v Romaine, 9 NY3d 454.*** The basic concept underlying FOIL is that all government documents and records, other than those having access specifically limited… [read post]
3 Aug 2022, 8:38 am
For example, in Xuedan Wang v. [read post]
16 Mar 2012, 5:48 pm
” The complaint in the new case, Bickerton v. [read post]
19 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The Seventh Circuit in Hollins v. [read post]
27 Nov 2015, 6:07 am
He argued that compelling him to disclose his text messages would violate the state and federal constitutions and was prohibited by state and federal statutes. . . . [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 1:10 pm
Hearst Communications, Inc. et al. [read post]
11 May 2015, 11:46 am
[Houghton Miflin v. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
As the Court of Appeals opined in Matter of Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, New York State's Freedom of Information Law [FOIL] "expresses this State's strong commitment to open government and public accountability and imposes a broad standard of disclosure upon the State and its agencies. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
As the Court of Appeals opined in Matter of Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, New York State's Freedom of Information Law [FOIL] "expresses this State's strong commitment to open government and public accountability and imposes a broad standard of disclosure upon the State and its agencies. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 9:13 am
Hearst. [read post]
2 May 2008, 10:00 am
Seidenberg who resigned early this year and Walter V. [read post]
1 Apr 2019, 10:39 am
” See Nixon v. [read post]
15 Feb 2015, 9:48 am
Scott v. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 3:25 pm
Hearst tried again in April. [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 8:21 am
Safety v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 12:20 pm
See United States v. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 1:01 am
Perhaps the most important such case was West Coast Hotel v. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 4:32 pm
See Hearst v Ganzi (2006) 145 CA4th 1195. [read post]
10 May 2011, 4:21 am
” Citing Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 109 AD2d 92, affd 67 NY2d 562, the Appellate Division said that the legislative history of §50-a indicates that the "statute was intended to apply to situations where a party to an underlying criminal or civil action is seeking documents in a police officer's personnel file, and was apparently designed to prevent 'fishing expeditions' to find material to use in cross-examination. [read post]
13 Aug 2019, 5:13 am
Hearst Corp. (2d Cir. 2015).) [read post]
