Search for: "Davis v. State"
Results 3041 - 3060
of 6,175
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Aug 2021, 3:09 am
Dist., 28 NY3d 455, 465 [2016]; Davis v Isaacson, Robustelli, Fox, Fine, Greco & Fogelgaren, 284 AD2d 104, 105 [2001]). [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 3:40 pm
Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271 (9th Cir. 2000), Nidds v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 3:40 pm
Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271 (9th Cir. 2000), Nidds v. [read post]
17 Jul 2015, 3:38 am
David Davis MP, Tom Watson MP and Others v the Secretary of State for the Home Department Today, the High Court found against the Government in David Davis’s and Tom Watson’s joint legal challenge to the Government’s emergency surveillance legislation. [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 4:56 am
Hitselberger has been charged by the United States of America on three counts of violating 18 U.S. [read post]
20 Apr 2017, 8:51 am
You surely recall the Hassell v. [read post]
23 Sep 2012, 5:28 am
”The panel drew a distinction between its ruling and a ruling by the Supreme Court last January in United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 8:18 am
The decision turned largely on one, key case: Davis v. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 4:17 am
” At the National Council of State Legislatures’ blog, Lisa Soronen looks at Nelson v. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 8:06 am
Davis, 503 S.W.2d 373, 377 (Tex. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 8:06 am
Davis, 503 S.W.2d 373, 377 (Tex. [read post]
4 Jul 2008, 3:14 pm
Davis Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids 08a0388n.06 2008/07/01 USA v. [read post]
4 Jul 2008, 3:14 pm
Davis Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids 08a0388n.06 2008/07/01 USA v. [read post]
1 Nov 2017, 9:01 pm
In this setting, states and cities argue that the anti-commandeering principle prevents the feds from requiring state and local authorities to affirmatively provide information about or access to individuals who may have committed immigration law violations.Perhaps the most important Supreme Court case on this point is Printz v. [read post]
7 Mar 2013, 1:40 pm
Ariz. 2003); Davis Chevrolet Inc. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2015, 1:42 pm
Dist. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2015, 1:42 pm
Dist. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 2:41 pm
From State v. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 8:28 am
Secretary of State of Energy and Climate Change [20.09.2013], Mansfield County Court, in which District Judge Davies, having heard submissions from both parties, ruled in favour of the Defendant (represented by Nabarro LLP) and held that NIHL is not a disease within the meaning of CPR 45.23 and therefore the 62.5% success fee did not apply. [read post]
