Search for: "STATE v BARTLETT"
Results 221 - 240
of 495
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2008, 6:55 am
In United States v. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 12:39 pm
In the recent case of State v. [read post]
1 Dec 2021, 5:49 am
Louis v. [read post]
23 May 2017, 2:32 pm
With regard to North Carolina’s Congressional District 1, which the legislature argued was justified as a race-based district because it was drawn to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the court applied Bartlett v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 1:40 pm
Bartlett v. [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
Following the release of orders, the Court will hear argument in: Bartlett v. [read post]
31 Dec 2014, 5:00 am
There’s good language in Bartlett (2013 #+1) [read post]
5 Jun 2019, 3:50 am
At the National Conference of State Legislators’ blog, Lisa Soronen looks at Allen v. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 6:22 am
Perhaps most notable are changes made to account for the Second Circuit’s 2018 decision (in United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 4:29 pm
(Ellington, C.J. and Miller, J. concurring)Bartlett v. [read post]
5 Feb 2023, 9:01 pm
Pirani v. [read post]
26 Aug 2015, 4:30 am
Sullivan v. [read post]
14 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
Following the release of orders, the Court will hear argument in Bartlett v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 9:55 am
(33) Kansas v. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 11:15 am
The Permanent Mission of India to the United NationsDocket: 10-627Issue(s): 1) Whether, in determining whether Congress authorized the Secretary of State ("Secretary") to preempt traditional state taxing powers by designating certain exemptions from state and local property tax laws under The Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 1:24 pm
Bartlett, 133 S.Ct. 2466 (2013) and Pliva, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 7:52 am
Bartlett Tree Expert Co. v. [read post]
18 Aug 2010, 7:20 am
Bartlett, 43 N.H. 224; Alexander v. [read post]
1 Aug 2018, 7:40 pm
Ass’n v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 2:36 am
However, even if a plaintiff establishes the first prong, the plaintiff must still demonstrate that he or she would have succeeded on the merits of the action but for the attorney's negligence (see Hamoudeh v Mandel, 62 AD3d 948, 949; McCluskey v Gabor & Gabor, 61 AD3d 646, 648; Peak v Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart & Rhodes, P.C., 28 AD3d 1028, 1030-31; see also Brodeur v Hayes, 18 AD3d 979; Raphael v Clune, White & Nelson, 201 AD2d… [read post]
