Search for: "Smith v. Superior Court"
Results 201 - 220
of 922
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 May 2020, 8:07 am
In 1987, the Supreme Court reinterpreted the logic and history of military justice and discarded that short-lived and unworkable “service-connected” test. [read post]
7 May 2020, 10:25 am
The Court of Appeals in State v. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 8:26 am
Superior Court, 132 Cal.App.4th 826, 833-35)). [read post]
15 Apr 2020, 4:12 pm
French argued that the governing case here is the Supreme Court case Employment Division v. [read post]
3 Apr 2020, 4:00 am
(Compare Smith v. [read post]
29 Mar 2020, 8:33 pm
In Smith v. [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 2:33 pm
The majority relied on Smith v. [read post]
17 Feb 2020, 8:50 am
Gayler v. [read post]
27 Jan 2020, 1:44 pm
Last week, the court of appeals in State v. [read post]
16 Jan 2020, 3:00 am
The court relied upon the line of cases following Lamp v. [read post]
6 Jan 2020, 1:00 am
In the case of Smith v. [read post]
31 Dec 2019, 7:12 am
In Alice Corporation v. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 1:23 pm
After being convicted in district court, the defendant appealed for trial de novo in superior court, and the jury found him guilty of the lesser charge of simple assault. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 10:42 am
I have just now gotten around to my notes from this excellent roundtable.Introduction: Mark McKenna & Graeme DinwoodieWhy do a roundtable like this? [read post]
29 Nov 2019, 6:01 am
These goals are rarely achieved with a three-V approach to dispute resolution. [read post]
24 Nov 2019, 4:08 pm
On 26 November 2019 there will be an application in the case of Kirkegaard v Smith. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 7:10 am
Indeed, in taking its relatively formal approach to the distinction between principal and superior officer, the Edmond Court had to distinguish the considerably less formalist opinion in Morrison v. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 8:54 pm
Smith & Nephew, Inc. [read post]
17 Oct 2019, 6:59 pm
In the case of Pearson v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:21 am
While represented by counsel, the Shireys voluntarily bargained for and agreed upon a settlement on all issues of alimony, child custody and support, and equitable distribution, which was reduced to writing, signed by all parties and was jointly presented to the court and entered as a Consent Order in the Mecklenburg County Clerk of Superior Court on 24 May 2016. [read post]
