Search for: "People v. Stage"
Results 321 - 340
of 4,220
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Sep 2017, 10:30 am
The owner argued that his religious beliefs about integration should allow him to break the law; he lost at every stage. [read post]
10 Mar 2022, 9:07 am
Gutman, JLM, the bridal wear company was successful at the PI stage precisely because it asserted trademark and contract claims. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 12:34 pm
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Carpenter v. [read post]
13 Dec 2019, 4:00 am
In Hak v. [read post]
12 Jan 2018, 5:35 am
Finally, the court found that Citizens had not preserved for judicial review the question of People's Zoning Counsel's alleged conflict of interest because it failed to raise the issue at any stage of the administrative proceedings.Accordingly, the court found the County Council's decision to approve the application for special exception to be correct as a matter of law.The full opinion is available in PDF. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 6:17 am
In Gandhi v. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 7:11 am
Plyler v. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 9:04 am
But even at this stage, a preliminary argument has broken out among patent people: which of the two elements is more difficult to apply? [read post]
30 Dec 2006, 8:22 am
By Eric Goldman Bradley v. [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 4:30 pm
From yesterday's U.S. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 6:59 am
The case, Robins v. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 5:02 pm
Last week's post discussed People v Jones (2015 NY Slip Op 09773), in which the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed a conviction in the interest of justice due to numerous acts of prosecutorial misconduct in summation which were egregious, but largely unpreserved by timely objection. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 5:02 pm
Last week's post discussed People v Jones (2015 NY Slip Op 09773), in which the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed a conviction in the interest of justice due to numerous acts of prosecutorial misconduct in summation which were egregious, but largely unpreserved by timely objection. [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 10:04 am
People v Dagwan, 269 Mich App 338, 711 NW2d 386 (2006). [read post]
11 Jun 2016, 4:10 pm
In her decision in Wong v. [read post]
17 Aug 2015, 4:23 am
Cablevision Systems Corp. v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 1:24 pm
Last week the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Pineda v. [read post]
21 May 2020, 7:50 am
Should Roe v. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 12:00 pm
As a result, those two beautiful Oracle v. [read post]
