Search for: "State v. Putnam"
Results 81 - 100
of 192
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jul 2009, 9:36 am
(i) For purposes of this contract, the term “Institutional Lender” shall mean any bank, savings bank, private banker, trust company, savings and loan association, credit union or similar banking institution whether organized under the laws of this state, the United States or any other state, foreign banking corporation licensed by the Superintendent of Banks of New York or regulated by the Comptroller of the Currency to transact business in New York… [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 2:26 pm
Putnam, 1 USPQ2d at 1773-74 (heavier burden imposed where applicant seeks to prove date of first use earlier than stated in its application). [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 9:52 pm
Warner v. [read post]
9 Aug 2011, 10:06 am
(RES) TZ 2 SP33 2011 Civil Rights With all deliberate speed : implementing Brown v. [read post]
13 Sep 2007, 12:09 pm
Putnam Funds Trust, Nos. 06-cv-939-DRH, 06-cv-1001-DRH, 2007 WL 1532116, at * 1 (S.D.Ill. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 4:16 am
Co., 30 NY3d 704, 710 [2018]; Fourth Ocean Putnam Corp. v Interstate Wrecking Co., 66 NY2d 38, 44 [1985]). [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 11:19 am
In People v. [read post]
12 Apr 2014, 12:00 am
[xx]Washington and Ohio also collect a B & O tax but on a state-wide basis. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 5:41 am
Certification of the payroll critical to lawfully paying an individual in the classified serviceEldridge v Carmel Cent. [read post]
16 Jul 2019, 2:25 am
Putnam Investments v. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 2:52 am
” People v Cox, 286 N.Y. 137, 142 (1941). [read post]
11 Aug 2009, 4:05 am
Applying the rational used by the court in Putnam, the Commissioner ruled that §3012(1)(a) was not applicable in Zalaman's situation and thus she was not entitled to a reduced probationary period. [read post]
24 Mar 2017, 11:50 am
Ocheesee Creamery LLC v. [read post]
5 Nov 2011, 9:46 am
Whren v U.S., 517 US 806; People v Robinson, 97 NY2d 341. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 4:36 am
“Allegations regarding an act of deceit or intent to deceive must be stated with particularity” (Facebook, Inc. v DLA Piper LLP [US], 134 AD3d 610, 615 [2015]; see Putnam County Temple & Jewish Ctr., Inc. v Rhinebeck Sav. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 4:00 pm
(citing Westchester Putnam Heavy & Highway Laborers Local 60 Benefit Funds v. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 3:59 am
“Allegations regarding an act of deceit or intent to deceive must be stated with particularity” (Facebook, Inc. v DLA Piper LLP [US], 134 AD3d 610, 615; see Putnam County Temple & Jewish Ctr., Inc. v Rhinebeck Sav. [read post]
23 May 2018, 3:59 am
“Allegations regarding an act of deceit or intent to deceive must be stated with particularity” (Facebook, Inc. v DLA Piper LLP [US], 134 AD3d 610, 615 [2015]; see Putnam County Temple & Jewish Ctr., Inc. v Rhinebeck Sav. [read post]
3 May 2017, 9:53 am
Bumpus v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 7:28 pm
It has further been held that no distinction need be made with respect to whether the property is personalty or realty (Putnam v. [read post]
