Search for: "Cross v. Davis"
Results 321 - 340
of 789
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Oct 2009, 8:46 am
(C.C.P. section 657(6)) In Hendricks v. [read post]
19 Nov 2008, 8:33 pm
As you can see above, Irby sought to cross-examine the victim regarding his juvenile deferred adjudication status for aggravated assault based on the perennial Davis v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 5:31 am
Davis v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:16 am
PARDONS & SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY Davis v. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 2:04 pm
Avgiris, Comment, Huddle up: surveying the playing field on the single entity status of the National Football League in anticipation of American Needle v. [read post]
25 Jul 2008, 2:07 pm
Supreme Court justices on both sides in the landmark D.C. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2023, 1:15 pm
Davie and Executive Director Sandford N. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:21 pm
Davis, footnote 1. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:21 pm
Davis, footnote 1. [read post]
7 Jun 2016, 10:45 am
Hansen Almanor Lakeside Villas Owners Assn. v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 1:42 pm
See Davis v. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 5:00 am
Davis v. [read post]
27 Mar 2009, 6:26 pm
- Pittsburgh lawyer David Wagner of Reed Smith on the firm's Environmental Law Resource Estate of Jorgensen v. [read post]
15 May 2017, 3:43 pm
V., 2016). [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 2:59 am
Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, in United States v. [read post]
4 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
” And on state constitutional flexibility in federal-election regulation, Kennedy a year earlier crossed Court-wing lines to join RBG’s seminal 5-4 opinion in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
2 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm
Indeed, the Supreme Court in 1975 in Taylor v. [read post]
9 Apr 2013, 4:57 am
The court also noted that "due process does not require a hearing . . . until the employee has raised a genuine dispute on [the] operative facts", citing Davis v Westchester County, 42 AD3 79 (appeal dismissed 9 NY3d 953) . [read post]
21 May 2015, 10:39 am
There are however a number of other points of interest.1) Synthon's expert, Professor Alethea Tabor, got into hot water because some inaccuracies in her initial expert report, pointed out by Prof Ben Davis in his reply report, were not corrected in a further reply report, but rather left to be dealt with in cross-examination. [read post]
