Search for: "State v. Cooper" Results 2221 - 2240 of 7,450
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2018, 8:15 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
An undercover police officer, Andrew Cooper, posed as an Obeahman called “Leon”. [read post]
16 Apr 2008, 8:32 am
The judge stated that he was entering a default on punitive damages for which he found a violation. [read post]
9 Apr 2020, 2:56 pm by Unknown
  A general statement of a duty to cooperate would be deemed insufficient.The insured’s failure to cooperate had made the carrier’s performance under the policy impossible;The carrier has given the insured an opportunity to cure, which must:Include the furnishing of written notice to the insured of the alleged failure to cooperate, describing with particularity the alleged failure, within 30 days of the alleged failure; andAllow the… [read post]
25 Feb 2025, 2:28 am by INFORRM
Summary judgment test The judge started out by repeating the explanation of the summary judgment test/principles set out in Easyair Ltd v Opal [2009] EWHC 339 (Ch), which states that: each claim must have a realistic rather than a fanciful prospect of success; a realistic claim is one that is “more than merely arguable”; and that in reaching its findings, the court must not conduct a “mini-trial”. [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 4:41 am by Marissa Miller
Arizona; (2) whether the interviewer’s state of mind has any bearing on whether a suspect's statement is voluntary under the established law of Oregon v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 2:00 am by Stephanie Figueroa
It appears the SEC has noted the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is developing due diligence guidance for conflict mineral supply chains, with subsequent endorsement from the US State Department. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 12:19 pm by Lyle Denniston
Cooper (10-209) and Missouri v. [read post]
24 Jan 2015, 7:47 am by SHG
The video of oral argument before the 9th Circuit in Baca v. [read post]
21 Jan 2012, 8:56 am by Steve Statsinger
But, following its own decision in Rivera, the court held that the new version of 1B1.10 does not apply retroactively.In United States v Murph, No. 10-1555-cr (2d Cir. [read post]