Search for: "BATES v. THE STATE"
Results 181 - 200
of 567
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
The Recalibration of Colonel Brock: D.C. Circuit Ruling for J6 Rioter Could Impact Hundreds of Cases
3 Mar 2024, 4:01 am
Here is the opinion: United States v. [read post]
6 Jun 2019, 12:52 pm
’” Bd. of Trs. of State Univ. of N.Y. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 1:16 am
" FEC v. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 3:43 am
United States and Thole v. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:34 am
In support of his contention that the LVT could entertain such a challenge within its jurisdiction Mr Bates relied on Jonathan Parker LJ in Ruddy v Oakfern Properties [2006] EWCA Civ 1389: In my judgment there is no justification for implying any restriction in the entirely general words of section 27A of the [Landlord and Tenant Act 1985]. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:34 am
In support of his contention that the LVT could entertain such a challenge within its jurisdiction Mr Bates relied on Jonathan Parker LJ in Ruddy v Oakfern Properties [2006] EWCA Civ 1389: In my judgment there is no justification for implying any restriction in the entirely general words of section 27A of the [Landlord and Tenant Act 1985]. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 4:20 am
” In the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, Elizabeth Slattery and Tiffany Bates “look at the justices’ attendance at the State of the Union, and they talk about Trump’s judicial nominations with [the Judicial Crisis Network]’s Carrie Severino. [read post]
13 Jan 2019, 4:35 pm
Bates and an unfortunate wife’s Fitbit in State v. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 4:05 am
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, W & BB v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Z, G, U & Y v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
10 Nov 2006, 1:29 pm
I am opposed to the proposed rules on three grounds -- a misunderstanding of the concept of ethics (see Bates et. al. v State Bar of Arizona); the rules themselves will not likely be upheld at the first legal challenge to them; and there is clearly a misunderstanding of the meaning of marketing for lawyers and the long-term effects of Bates in serving both law firms and, most significantly, clients. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 4:30 am
Lewis v. [read post]
24 Sep 2018, 4:34 pm
Srinivasan challenges Phillips’ third contention, suggesting that United States v. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 5:19 am
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 7:44 pm
With respect to F&V, LP stated that it served its first round of discovery requests on September 20, 2011, and F&V did not serve responses until November 2, 2011. [read post]
14 Jul 2018, 11:47 am
United States, Maurer identified an argument that the parties, the amici, and the court did not make. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 3:13 pm
(The lead case is Al Maqaleh, et al., v. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 11:44 am
Bates, Obado v. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 9:57 am
State v. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 4:02 am
” At the Pacific Legal Foundation blog, Ethan Blevins urges the justices to “grant Brott v. [read post]
