Search for: "Davis v. THE STATE" Results 3601 - 3620 of 6,204
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Jul 2019, 7:34 pm by Richard Hunt
The applicable statute of limitations, borrowed from state law, was four years. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 11:07 am by Andrew Hamm
Davis, when it is plausible that the failure to investigate that aspect of petitioner’s background on state postconviction review could, given substantial authority recognizing counsel’s duty to do so, excuse the procedural default of an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. [read post]
28 Sep 2018, 12:39 pm by Guest Blogger
State Bar Director Christy Amuny of Beaumont and Granbury attorney Cindy V. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 10:43 pm by cdw
Other cases of note includes yet another grant of relief in Arizona on aggravating factor (F)(6) (heinousness, cruelty, and depravity) in State v. [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 12:08 pm by Jeanne Huang
Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v Schlunk decided by the Supreme Court of the US and Segers and Rufa BV v. [read post]
6 Feb 2016, 12:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
Perhaps unsurprisingly, a federal court sent his hostile work environment claim under Title VII to trial (Davis v. [read post]
6 Apr 2018, 1:21 pm by John Elwood
Davis, 17-6883 Issue: Whether — when the U.S. [read post]
27 Jun 2021, 2:13 pm by Ralf Michaels
Similar to previous cases, such as Mennesson v France, Labassee v France, andParadiso and Campanelli v Italy, this complaint originated from the refusal of national authorities to recognise the parent-child relationship established in accordance with foreign law on the ground that surrogacy is prohibited under national law. [read post]
15 Oct 2021, 4:23 pm by Ana Popovich
The film festival, hosted by news organization 100Reporters and now in its seventh year, kicked off with a screening of Sonia Kennebeck’s documentary “United States v. [read post]
5 Aug 2008, 7:18 pm
In Judge Davis's original order, he stated that he was contemplating granting a new trial based on a possible error in Jury Instruction No. 15. [read post]
10 Jun 2019, 8:04 am by Dan Bressler
” After various facts played out and an unhappy client sued, said the Court: “‘An attorney may not be held liable for failing to act outside the scope of a retainer (see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]). [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 3:10 pm by Richard D. Friedman
Alaska, and presumably the state assumed that the court would hold the later statements to be testimonial, under the other part of Davis (the part governing Hammon v. [read post]