Search for: "State v. Sullivan" Results 521 - 540 of 2,431
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The Town Attorney had concluded that Town Law §81 did not permit a referendum concerning term limits.Finding that there was no statutory basis for a public referendum on this particular issue, the Appellate Division ruled that Plaintiffs' petition failed to adequately allege a clear legal right to the relief Plaintiffs sought and sustained the Supreme Court's granting the Respondents' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' petition for failure to state a cause of actionThe… [read post]
18 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The Town Attorney had concluded that Town Law §81 did not permit a referendum concerning term limits.Finding that there was no statutory basis for a public referendum on this particular issue, the Appellate Division ruled that Plaintiffs' petition failed to adequately allege a clear legal right to the relief Plaintiffs sought and sustained the Supreme Court's granting the Respondents' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' petition for failure to state a cause of actionThe… [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 4:28 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
We also agree with the Supreme Court’s determination denying that branch of the defendant’s motion which was based upon CPLR 3211(a)(3) to dismiss the fourth cause of action insofar as asserted against the defendant for lack of standing (see General Obligations Law § 13-101; Greevy v Becker, Isserlis, Sullivan & Kurtz, 240 AD2d 539, 541). [read post]
16 Aug 2020, 8:14 am by Rob Robinson
Editor’s Note: These are the results of the fifth semi-annual Predictive Coding Technologies and Protocols Survey conducted by ComplexDiscovery. [read post]
5 Jul 2020, 3:50 pm by Mark Lahn
This is what the Court of Appeal For Ontario decided in the case of R v Sullivan. [read post]
5 Jul 2020, 3:50 pm by Mark Lahn
This is what the Court of Appeal For Ontario decided in the case of R v Sullivan. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 9:49 am by Grant Sullivan
Sullivan is an assistant solicitor general with the Colorado Attorney General’s office, which filed an amicus brief on behalf of nine states in support of respondents in Espinoza v. [read post]
29 Jun 2020, 4:42 pm by John Jascob
The court’s decision comes just days before the rule’s June 30 compliance date (XY Planning Network, LLC v. [read post]
23 Jun 2020, 9:00 pm by Vikram David Amar
  This statute was mentioned by the Court in 1988 as support for its opinion in the famous independent counsel case, Morrison v. [read post]
22 Jun 2020, 6:22 am by Richard Hunt
The danger of being the enforcer The plaintiff in Sullivan v. [read post]