|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases —
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case —
for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more.
lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
|
| |
State Courts -
New York - January 26, 2006
|
| |
Matter of Lopez v. Robinson, 96342,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Trial court properly granted a mother's petition to modify an order of child custody because the award was in the best interest of the child under N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1)(a), as the mother had been the primary caregiver and the evidence indicated that the father abused alcohol and drugs and was involved in other criminal activity.
|
|
| |
Matter of Marione v. Commissioner of Labor, 98580,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: The New York Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board properly found that a claimant was disqualified from unemployment insurance benefits because she was terminated due to misconduct. It was undisputed that the claimant provided the employer with a time sheet falsely representing that she was present at work during a time when she was on vacation.
|
|
| |
Matter of McGuire v. Hoblock, 7700 Index 115762/04,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Pearl v. New York State Div. of Parole, 98683,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Parole board appropriately considered relevant statutory factors, including the nature of the offense, receipt of an earned eligibility certificate, clean disciplinary record, and prior criminal history, in determining that an inmate's release would be incompatible with the community's safety and welfare, N.Y. Exec. Law § 259-i(1)(a); (2)(c)(A).
|
|
| |
Matter of Raheem v. Dennison, 98790,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Reich, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Snyder v. CNA Ins. Cos., 98606,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Sorkin, M-5966,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Order Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Pursuant to N.Y. Jud. Ct. Acts Law § 90(4)(a) an attorney ceased to be an attorney in New York upon her conviction of a felony, offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree. Her name was tricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law.
|
|
| |
Matter of Tyquan N., 7706,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Matter of Van Riper, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT, January 26, 2006, Decided , January 26, 2006, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Disbarment was only appropriate sanction for New York attorney who already had a prior criminal conviction and other disciplinary problems when he was convicted of filing a false federal income tax return.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
