Search for: "States v. State"
Results 3381 - 3400
of 258,339
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2024, 8:03 am
While the Sixth Circuit largely affirmed the trial court decision, the appeals court vacated a punitive damages award of $67,650 because the district court gave improper jury instructions (House v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 8:00 am
Mo.)EEOC v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 7:29 am
Garrigan v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 7:20 am
As with the plan invalidated in Biden v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 6:47 am
On May 3, 2024, in Geospatial Technology Associates, LLC v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 6:39 am
It arises in a criminal case where the defendant was accused of making threats relating to his employment with the Post Office.The case is United States v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Matter of Joseph v Sewell 2024 NY Slip Op 02985 Decided on May 30, 2024 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Matter of Joseph v Sewell 2024 NY Slip Op 02985 Decided on May 30, 2024 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 5:50 am
* Rahimi could be written in a way that helps Hunter Biden, but let's face it: U.S. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 5:50 am
Human Rights Committee’s decision in Teitiota v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 5:37 am
The comment explores whether plaintiffs might be able… Continue reading The post “Arkansas State Conference NAACP v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 5:19 am
United States (E.D. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 5:01 am
From Hayes v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 4:57 am
The referring court was right to state that the protection under Art. 8(3) CDR does not require the design to serve an aesthetic function. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 4:53 am
It is also important to note that, after the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 4:29 am
Before we get to that, however, let's discuss corruption.In McCutcheon v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 3:44 am
Mills Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2024, 11:00 pm
And on its review, the Appellate Division, Second Department, noted that, by law, claims against the State must be sworn to (or otherwise affirmed under oath).Since this claim was not “verified by the claimant,” the AD2 agreed that a fundamental statutory condition had not been met, and that dismissal was necessary.There’s just no other way to state that.# # #DECISIONF. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
Koble Investments v. [read post]
11 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
Koble Investments v. [read post]