Search for: "State v. Court of Appeals, Division I" Results 2201 - 2220 of 4,097
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Sep 2019, 6:23 am by Irina Manta
Essentially questioning the existence of an actionable form of harm, the majority decision of the Superior Court, Appellate Division, stated: At the time plaintiff first became aware she was pregnant, she had the legal right to safely abort the fetus. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 5:48 am by Beck, et al.
But plaintiffs filed suit in New York state court. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 7:30 pm
  Decisions by the Appellate Term can then be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, with permission.) [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 7:25 am by Rick
The Court of Appeal then reversed the appellate division of the trial court, stating that, after all, the government does still at least need probable cause to justify a detention and search. [read post]
6 Jun 2016, 5:33 am by Neil Cahn
” Family Court Act §413(1)(b)(5)(i); Domestic Relations Law §1-b(b)(5)(i). [read post]
6 Jun 2016, 5:33 am by Neil Cahn
” Family Court Act §413(1)(b)(5)(i); Domestic Relations Law §1-b(b)(5)(i). [read post]
3 Jul 2015, 4:40 pm by INFORRM
” Somewhat tantalisingly Weller v Associated Newspapers ([2014] EWHC 1163 (QB))– involving the publication of photographs of children (not suspected of any misconduct) taken in a public place which held that the parents’ conduct was a relevant factor (currently on appeal to the Court of Appeal) – was not referred to in the judgment. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 8:53 am by Roy Ginsburg
Let me juxtapose the mindset of SAS’s CEO with a case recently reported from the State of Utah, Hudgens v. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 3:05 pm
Nihiser, 191 Ariz. 199 from Division Two in 1997 and State v. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 7:53 am
  Still, the opening section of the New York Court of Appeals' 1968 decision in the Saks case is worth repeating:  There is an old saying that "clothes make the man". [read post]
11 May 2018, 6:04 am by Diane Tweedlie
In opposition proceedings against the European patent in this case, the Division admitted an intervention on the basis that the patent proprietor had, in Germany, instituted independent evidentiary proceedings (BSV proceedings) against the intervener, whereby a court-appointed inspector is empowered to take evidence of possible infringement. [read post]
11 May 2018, 6:04 am by Diane Tweedlie
In opposition proceedings against the European patent in this case, the Division admitted an intervention on the basis that the patent proprietor had, in Germany, instituted independent evidentiary proceedings (BSV proceedings) against the intervener, whereby a court-appointed inspector is empowered to take evidence of possible infringement. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 3:02 am
The court reversed the Board’s ruling and remanded the matter to it “for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court's decision. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 9:00 pm
089490/A089491, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE,? [read post]