Search for: "WEEKS v. STATE"
Results 21 - 40
of 41,685
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, 5:10 am
In Pliva, Inc. v Mensing (564 U.S. 604 [2011]), the Supreme Court found that these plaintiffs’ state-law claims against generic manufacturers were preempted by federal law under the Supremacy Clause to the extent that state-law failure-to-warn statutes required generic drugs to provide more stringent, safer warning labels. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:45 am
The case is Jamie Allen Harless v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 6:05 am
” At its core, Weinstein’s case simply applied the long-established rules of the more than century-old case of People v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 4:25 am
Beavers v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 4:10 am
Suit was filed last week in an Indiana state trial court by an anti-abortion organization objecting to the state Health Department's new policy of releasing only aggregate data from Termination of Pregnancy Reports filed by abortion providers. [read post]
8 May 2024, 3:52 pm
” UC President Michael V. [read post]
8 May 2024, 1:28 pm
United States (Treaty Rights; "Bad Men" Provision) Reges v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 4:53 am
That lawfare got underway this week when TikTok filed a substantial lawsuit (by the pound) to stop the sale and protect access to the US market, just a little while longer. [read post]
8 May 2024, 4:26 am
In comparison, Daniels may be the only authentic part of the entire case in New York v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 4:10 am
The complaint (full text) in People of the State of New York v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 12:30 pm
Bissonnette v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:32 am
” The claimant was paid LWA for weeks 31, 33, 34, and 36 of 2020 in the amount of $1,200.00 [$300 each week], for which the claimant was not eligible and to which the claimant was not entitled, and that the payment of such benefits was due to. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:42 am
Bell v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:12 am
Per another Supreme Court precedent, United States v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:01 pm
The FTC summarily states that a “hypothetical monopolist of accessible luxury handbags likely would undertake a SSNIPT on consumers” and could do so profitably. [read post]
6 May 2024, 11:57 am
SCARFE J.P., R. v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 10:42 am
"] From A.M.B. v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 6:30 am
McCabe (concluding that the classification of marijuana was not rational); State v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 5:23 am
Eve, following up on an opinion from a week before in Doe v. [read post]
