Search for: "REITER v. STATE"
Results 281 - 300
of 4,502
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jan 2018, 6:05 pm
In United States v. [read post]
5 Jan 2021, 3:26 pm
Balderas v. [read post]
14 Jul 2022, 9:13 am
To reiterate, we do not take a position on that question. [read post]
30 Sep 2011, 4:52 pm
[Post by Venkat Balasubramani] State v. [read post]
30 May 2012, 6:17 am
Motiva LLC v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 6:54 am
They issued just one decision, in United States v. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 7:30 pm
Brewer and Gagnon v. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 10:55 am
Trump reiterated his oft-stated campaign pledge that he would appoint judges and justices who were pro-life and committed to overturning Roe; he suggested that if Roe were reversed, access to abortion would be up to each state. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 3:00 am
In DeBouse v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 2:43 pm
State of Hawaii, 2012 DJDAR 7472 (9th Cir. 2012).) [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 11:42 pm
State Immunity, Violation of Human Rights and the Individual’s Right for Reparations – A Comment on the ICJ’s Judgment of February 2, 2012 (Germany v. [read post]
30 Apr 2017, 5:20 am
The recent decision of Rodgers v. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 12:43 pm
Samsung, et al., the United States District Court for the Northern District of California reiterated the importance of preserving electronically stored information. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 1:23 pm
As such, because the full scope of the claims was not enabled, the court affirmed the summary judgment of no enablement.More detail of Sitrick v. [read post]
4 Jul 2011, 10:15 am
State v. [read post]
2 Oct 2013, 3:18 am
Judge Newman further challenges Jaffer, reiterating his contention that a Vaughn index is too vague to be useful and stating that this case is primarily about the OLC-DOD memo. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 12:07 pm
In Abood v. [read post]
16 Mar 2017, 6:30 am
Reiterating the Court’s conclusion in its earlier landmark case, New York v. [read post]
