Search for: "Youmans v. Youmans" Results 1 - 20 of 20
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2021, 6:25 am by mtlawlibrary
Youmans DA 18-0335 2021 MT 134N Criminal – Other State v. [read post]
23 Aug 2022, 2:13 pm
’” In  re Youman, 679 F.3d at 1342; see also MBO Lab’ys, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 10:14 am
On the other hand, applying New York law in this instance, pursuant to the doctrine of primary assumption of risk, a participant "engaging in a sport or recreational activity... consents to those commonly appreciated risks which are inherent in and arise out of the nature of the sport generally and flow from such participation" (Morgan v State of New York, 90 NY2d 471, 484 [1997]; see Turcotte v Fell, 68 NY2d 432, 438-440 [1986]; Youmans v Maple Ski… [read post]
26 Mar 2011, 12:33 pm by Brian Shiffrin
Clearly, Washington (a witness who was described by witness Youman as having given a false statement) was such a witness at defendant's trial, and nondisclosure cannot be excused merely because the trial prosecutor genuinely disbelieved Youmans' recantation. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 4:17 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The law provides absolute immunity from liability for defamation based on oral or written statements made by attorneys in connection with a proceeding before a court “ ’when such words and writings are material and pertinent to the questions involved’ ” (Front, Inc. v Khalil, 24 NY3d 713, 718 [2015], quoting Youmans v Smith, 153 NY 214, 219 [1897]; see Weinstock v Sanders, 144 AD3d 1019, 1020 [2016]; see also… [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 4:44 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The law provides absolute immunity from liability for defamation based on oral or written statements made by attorneys in connection with a proceeding before a court “ ’when such words and writings are material and pertinent to the questions involved’ ” (Front, Inc. v Khalil, 24 NY3d 713, 718 [2015], quoting Youmans v Smith, 153 NY 214, 219 [1897]; see Weinstock v Sanders, 144 AD3d 1019, 1020 [2016]; see also… [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 4:17 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The law provides absolute immunity from liability for defamation based on oral or written statements made by attorneys in connection with a proceeding before a court ” when such words and writings are material and pertinent to the questions involved'” (Front, Inc. v Khalil, 24 NY3d 713, 718, quoting Youmans v Smith, 153 NY 214, 219; see Weinstock v Sanders, 144 AD3d 1019, 1020; see also Stega v New York Downtown Hosp., 31… [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 3:48 pm
It's also worth noting that Lancaster's complaint against Seyfarth does not delve into the merits of Blanks v. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 4:20 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
” “A “witness at a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding enjoys an absolute privilege with respect to his or her testimony,” as long as the statements made are material to the issues to be resolved therein (Pfeiffer v Hoffman, 251 AD2d 94, 95 [1998]; accord Martinson v Blau, 292 AD2d 234, 235 [2002]; see Youmans v Smith, 153 NY 214, 219 [1897]; Wilson v Erra, 94 AD3d 756, 756-757 [2012]). [read post]