Search for: "Williams v. Davis" Results 221 - 240 of 1,081
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Sep 2012, 10:00 am by Dan Ernst
  The justices might readily concede the relevance of, say, William Treanor’s writings on the Takings Clause (e.g., here) or a study of Pumpelly v. [read post]
20 Jan 2014, 4:17 pm by Randall Hodgkinson
Davis (argue)Improper eyewitness ID instructionFailure to give limiting instruction re: gang evidenceMarch 6--Thursday--a.m.State v. [read post]
4 May 2010, 5:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
Fenrich of Davis Polk & Wardwell presented the defense position. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 1:55 pm by WIMS
      Among its findings, the report reveals that two of the judges on the appeals panel, Judges Jerry Edwin Smith and William Eugene Davis, frequently represented the oil and gas industries while in private practice. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 6:10 am by Adam Chandler
At ACSblog, Martha Davis marks International Women’s Day with a discussion of Flores-Villar v. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 3:01 pm by lawshucks
And congratulations to the upstanding DPW (led by William Aaronson) and V&E (led by Jeffery Floyd and Stephen Gill) lawyers working on the deal who had nothing to do with this nonsense. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 5:18 am
Davis (1992), 80 Ohio App.3d 277, 285, 609 N.E.2d 174 (distinguishing the facts therein from Minnesota v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 3:39 pm by Randall Hodgkinson
Marlin Williams, No. 102,036 (Sedgwick)Direct appeal (petition for review); Agg traffickingMichelle A. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 3:58 am
Although the employee's petition seeking to annul the Commissioner's action was dismissed by State Supreme Court Justice William Davis, the Appellate Division reversed Justice Davis' decision “on the law. [read post]
25 May 2018, 10:26 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Kaufman, P.C., 156 AD3d 436, 66 N.Y.S.3d 474 [1st Dept 2017]).The allegations [*2]  that plaintiffs were subjected by defendant Father Reilly to a barrage of vulgar, misogynous and ageist remarks and epithets, which defendants Robert Richard and Greg Manos echoed, condoned, and amplified, state causes of action under the New York City Human Rights Law (Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107) for gender and age discrimination through a hostile work environment (see Hernandez… [read post]