Search for: "Pooler v State"
Results 201 - 220
of 307
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Mar 2011, 9:05 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 6:45 am
This week’s per curiam opinions both deal with sentencing matters.First is United States v. [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 9:01 am
The answer is no.The case is El Sayed v. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 5:23 am
The Second Circuit (Pooler, Hall and Trager [D.J.], dissenting) deems this a bad-faith one, citing Missouri v. [read post]
19 Dec 2010, 6:09 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Dec 2010, 5:51 am
December 14, 2010) (Jacobs, Pooler, Parker, CJJ)In United States v. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 1:13 pm
United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2010, 8:30 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 10:51 am
Portolatin v. [read post]
25 Oct 2010, 7:00 am
Critically, the state defendants exercised the state's regulatory power," Judge Pooler writes. [read post]
23 Sep 2010, 6:15 am
But it's not 1973 anymore.The case is Chase Group Alliance LLC v. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 12:20 pm
According to the April 29, 2010 panel decision, the Court affirmed the district court decision because the Court’s 2005 decision in Joblove v. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 3:21 pm
The Department of Justice, the FTC, and 34 states–led by Vermont, California, and Florida—had filed briefs with the court, calling for en banc review. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 6:13 am
Thus, to the extent that any state court failed to afford relief for prejudicial error, that oversight would be contrary to both the federal and state standard, and could be dealt with on case by case review.In dissent from the denial of in banc review, Judge Jacobs writes on behalf of Judges Pooler, Lynch and Chin in stating that the Second Circuit needs to iron out these dual ineffective assistance standards. [read post]
5 Sep 2010, 6:20 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 7:12 am
Constitution.The case is Hollander v. [read post]
14 Aug 2010, 1:43 pm
United States v. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 6:36 am
Mary's Honor Center v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 11:19 am
July 16, 2010) (Calabresi, Pooler, Chin, CJJ)In United States v. [read post]
23 Jul 2010, 6:44 am
In particular, the Court of Appeals (Pooler, Parker and Wesley) says, this "statute ... allows individuals to transport firearms from one state in which they are legal, through another state in which they are illegal, to a third state in which they are legal, provided that several conditions are met, without incurring criminal liability under local gun laws. [read post]
