Search for: "State v. W. D."
Results 1 - 20
of 5,013
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:07 pm
United States, and Shoop v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 2:47 pm
Almost 30 years ago, SCOTUS issued its opinion in United States v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 11:46 am
” Case No. 01001976380 | The People of the State of California v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:20 am
But in any event, I thought I'd mention what's going on here. [read post]
3 May 2024, 8:11 am
But in any event, I thought I'd mention what's going on here. [read post]
1 May 2024, 1:21 pm
United States, No. 6:15-CV-01517-AA, 2023 WL 9023339, at *1 (D. [read post]
1 May 2024, 11:04 am
John W. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 3:12 pm
E. coli O157:H7 is one of thousands of serotypes Escherichia coli.[1] The combination of letters and numbers in the name of the E. coli O157:H7 refers to the specific antigens (proteins which provoke an antibody response) found on the body and tail or flagellum[2] respectively and distinguish it from other types of E. coli.[3] Most serotypes of E. coli are harmless and live as normal flora in the intestines of healthy humans and… [read post]
27 Apr 2024, 2:40 pm
Moreover, at least three important precedents--United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 11:05 am
The FTC’s odds are bad but I’d give them maybe a 10% chance of winning? [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 4:12 pm
I had a sense of déjà vu. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 3:45 pm
Could President George W. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 3:16 pm
Maryland, as well as to United States v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Trump, supra, 928 F. 3d at 236, focusing on whether the social media site functions as a “tool of governance” “swathe[d] in the trappings of [the official’s] office,” see, Davison v. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 4:27 pm
But I thought I'd canvass some opinions from scholars who have focused on this question (which is quite separate, of course, from the question whether the speaker's and senators' actions were wise). 1. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 10:51 am
From yesterday's Ohio Court of Appeals decision in State v. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 2:33 pm
These proposed rules come in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
