Search for: "Solomon v. State"
Results 341 - 360
of 449
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jun 2009, 8:02 am
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama which, after trial, issued an opinion exploring numerous problems with eyewitness identification testimony and explaining why it allowed a defense expert (Solomon Fulero) to testify about eyewitness identification in general but not about the specific witnesses in the case (United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 5:05 am
Shaun discusses the Second Circuit’s decision in Townsend v. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 3:00 am
Solomon v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 10:02 am
” He also mentioned the recent decision in SEC v. [read post]
6 Sep 2020, 4:21 pm
Puttaswamy v. [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 12:35 pm
She came to this country as a teenage refugee from Vietnam and later served in the United States Army. [read post]
19 Sep 2007, 12:30 pm
In Washington state Heller Ehrman wrote an amicus brief on behalf of a group of historians in the same-sex marriage case, Andersen v. [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 2:09 pm
, Titanium Metals Corp. v. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 5:08 am
This antiquated law has caused numerous unjust results, and ultimately caused the New Jersey Supreme Court to engage in Solomon – like behavior in an attempt to reconcile a very difficult situation, in Green v. [read post]
29 Oct 2011, 2:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
14 Mar 2015, 6:08 am
Yet, collaboration gave us the Supreme Court’s opinion in Buck v. [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 10:50 pm
The test for a second opinion was recently re-stated by Master Hyslop in Shaw v. [read post]
5 Jan 2023, 12:40 am
International – Compagnia Generale Distribuzione s.p.a. v Zorro Productions Inc.).In delivering its new judgment in the long-running (15+ years and counting!) [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 4:27 pm
In United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 11:29 am
Recall that in 2018, in Pereira v. [read post]
3 Aug 2022, 7:20 am
East Bay Drywall, LLC v. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 1:54 am
RCB applied to the General Court for the annulment of the Board's decision on two grounds: (i) that the reasoning given by the Board was inadequate and (ii) that it was wrong anyway.The General Court gave the judgment of Solomon, upholding the Board's decision for most goods but annulling it to the extent that it refused the CTM for ‘whips, harness, and saddlery’. [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 1:00 pm
” (R. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2022, 11:02 am
Dunahee v. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 2:38 pm
In Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. [read post]
