Case law

Opinion No.

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 3, 2001

Draper v. State, 621 P.2d 1142 , 1145 (Okla. 1980). … Cowart v.

Henderson v. N.C. Department of Correction

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Sep 13, 2011

Under the Tort Claims Act, the General Assembly has conferred upon the Industrial Commission jurisdiction over tort claims filed "against the State Board of Education, the Board of Transportation, and all other departments … The Act is in partial derogation of sovereign immunity, see Stone v. N.C.

Jersey Central Power & Light Co. v. City of Asbury Park

21 N.J. Misc. 372 · New Jersey Tax Court · May 17, 1943

Jersey Central Power and Light Co. v. Asbury Park (Supreme Court), 128 N. J. L. 141; 24 Atl. Rep. (2d) 526; affirmed by the Court of Errors and Appeals without opinion, Jersey Central Power and Light Co. v. … Monmouth County Board of Taxation, 129 N. J. L. 253; 29 Atl. Rep. (2d) 139. The assessments appealed from are, therefore, canceled. Judgment accordingly.

Opinion No. (1998)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 27, 1998

Supp. 1997, § 3[ 85-3 ] (6); see also Crowder v. Continental Materials Company, 590 P.2d 201 , 203 (Okla. 1979); Bowman v. … Atkinson v. Haliburton Company, 905 P.2d 772 , 776 (Okla. 1995); Tate v. Browning-Ferris, Inc., 833 P.2d 1218 , 1229 (Okla. 1992). Therefore, there is nothing mandating the owner-employee to obtain such a certificate.

Bailey

8 Wend. 339 · Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · Dec 15, 1831

In Brinkerhoof v. Brown, 4 Johns. Ch. … And in Brinkerhoof v. Brown, 6 Johns. Ch. R. 139, it was held, that different judgment creditors may unite in one bill for discovery and account, to remove impediments at law created by the fraud of their common debtor.

Union Township, St. Joseph County v. State of Indiana, Department of Local Government Finance

45 N.E.3d 523 · Indiana Tax Court · Nov 12, 2015

See Brown v. Dep’t of Local Gov’t Fin., 989 N.E.2d 386, 388 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2013). … See, e.g., Board of Comm’rs v. Vincent, 988 N.E.2d 1280, 1281 (Ind.

In re Commissioner of Department of Housing Preservation & Development

131 Misc. 2d 505 · Civil Court of the City of New York · Mar 24, 1986

The situation is far different from that in Long v Kissling Real Estate ( 80 Misc 2d 817 [Rockland County Ct 1975]) relied upon by the owner. … The Loft Board has been developing expertise and a special staff; the courts give great deference to its decisions. (See, e.g., Korn v Gleich, NYLJ, Feb. 17, 1984, p 6, col 3 [App Term, 1st Dept].)

Maurer v. Maurer

2013 NCBC 44 · North Carolina Business Court · Aug 23, 2013

Maurer v. Maurer, 2013 NCBC 44. … The presumption “can be rebutted by a showing that the board violated one of its fiduciary duties in connection with the challenged transaction.” Wachovia Capital Partners, LLC v. Frank Harvey Inv.

Green v. State

107 Misc. 557 · New York Court of Claims · Jun 15, 1919

themselves as members of the board of trustees. … Lewis v. State of New York, 96 N. Y. 71 ; Sipple v. State of New York , 99 id. 284; Stone v. State of New York , 138 id. 124 ; Litchfield v. Bond, 186 id. 66.

Andrews, Torey v. Yates Services, LLC

2017 TN WC App. 33 · Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board · May 23, 2017

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD Torey Andrews ) Docket No. 2016-05-0854 ) v. … See Hadzic v. Averitt Express, No. 2014-02-0064, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 14, at *13 n.4 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd.

Brockman-El v. N.C. Dept. of Correction

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Jun 29, 2011

Pursuant to the Tort Claims Act, the General Assembly has conferred upon the Industrial Commission jurisdiction over tort claims filed "against the State Board of Education, the Board of Transportation, and all other departments … The Act is in partial derogation of sovereign immunity, see Stone v. N.C.

Yarbrough, James v. Protective Services Co., Inc.

2016 TN WC App. 24 · Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board · May 27, 2016

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD James Yarbrough ) Docket No. 2015-08-0574 ) v. … Tryon v. Saturn Corp., 254 S.W.3d 321, 327 (Tenn. 2008).

Commissioner of Social Services v. Efrain V.

122 Misc. 2d 667 · New York Family Court · Feb 8, 1984

(Mills v Habluetzel, 456 US 91 ; Pickett v Brown, 462 US —, 103 S Ct 2199 ; Matter of Esther W. v Melvin H., 119 Misc 2d 690 ; Matter of Patricia R. v Peter W., 120 Misc 2d 986 .) … DISCUSSION The case before me differs from Pickett v Brown (supra) and Mills v Habluetzel (supra), in that there is no discrimination against the children.

Sauber, Sarah v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc.

2020 TN WC 75 · Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · Aug 13, 2020

McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015). … The Workers’ Compensation Judge must approve the statement before the record is submitted to the Appeals Board.

In re the Estate of Mann

5 Mills Surr. 467 · New York Surrogate's Court · Jul 15, 1906

Were such recourse imperative, a sufficient reason for this enactment might be found in the transformation, mental and physical, wrought in woman 'by marriage and cohabitation and by her changed relationships (Lathrop v. … Brown v. Clark, 77 N. Y. 369 ; Lathrop v. Dunlop, supra. The words of the statute fit the very case at bar.

Arlene Ernstes v. Printpack, Inc.

2022 TN WC App. 42 · Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board · Dec 15, 2022

Madden v. Holland Grp. of Tenn., Inc., 277 S.W.3d 896, 898 (Tenn. 2009). However, “[n]o similar deference need be afforded the trial court’s findings based upon documentary evidence.” Goodman v. Schwarz Paper Co., No. … See Mansell v. Bridgestone Firestone N. Am. Tire, LLC, 417 S.W.3d 393, 399 (Tenn. 2013).

JDM Washington Street, LLC v. 90 Washington Rest. Associates, LLC

36 Misc. 3d 769 · Civil Court of the City of New York · Jun 11, 2012

The only case cited by respondent in support of its instant motion to dismiss is the unpublished decision in Brown v Tribro Assoc. LLC (Civ Ct, NY County, Jan. 27, 2012, index No. 80081/11). … The result in Brown, and the dicta in the other cases discussed above, is understandable given the expansive language quoted above from 1587 Broadway.

Martin v. State

185 Misc. 2d 799 · New York Court of Claims · Sep 6, 2000

Some lower courts have held that due diligence means within 24 hours, while the Court of Appeals has not specified a time period (Matter of Miller v Board of Assessors, 91 NY2d 82, 86, n 3 ). … It may only see that the requirements of the law are complied with.’ ” (Parochial Bus Sys. v Board of Educ., 60 NY2d 539, 548 .)

Porter v. Commonwealth

73 Pa. D. & C.2d 185 · Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board · Jul 31, 1975

of DER. ..Warren Sand & Gravel Co., Inc. et al v. … In Wood v.

Opinion No. Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 28, 1984

OPINION — AG — ** AD VALOREM TAXATION — REVENUES — APPORTIONMENT ** (1) UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 70 O.S. 691 [ 70-691 ] AND THE RULING OF "INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, TULSA COUNTY V. … BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, TULSA COUNTY, 674 P.2d 547 (1983)" ALL COUNTY TREASURERS IN OKLAHOMA MUST CREDIT MONEY EARNED FROM INVESTMENT OF AD VALOREM TAX REVENUES TEMPORARILY IN THEIR CUSTODY, BUT ULTIMATELY ATTRIBUTABLE