Search for: "State v. Quick" Results 3621 - 3640 of 4,835
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 May 2011, 2:11 pm by George M. Wallace
  Joseph Rakofsky has filed a lawsuit, in the courts of the State of New York, seeking damages and injunctive relief based upon defamation and invasion of his civil rights. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 2:27 pm by Jamie Baker
  A quick look at the Westlaw version shows that it should be Cocaine – Bail From November 5, 2018: In the Case People v Kindell, 148 AD3d 456 (1st Dept 2017), Susan Axelrod is listed as both the counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 1:32 am by Kevin Healey
The court made quick work of the defense, stating that “agents employed…for their expertise…may not claim any greater duty on their clients’ part to anticipate and rectify their errors. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 9:20 am
Supreme Court has specifically held that arbitration clauses are subject to generally applicable state contract law defenses such as unconscionability. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 2:16 pm by Iantha Haight
Fogelson (2005) Making Civil Rights Law: Thurgood Marshall and the Supreme Court, 1936-1961 by Mark V. [read post]
14 Oct 2007, 6:04 pm
If you've read Snow Falling on Cedars or seen The War, or have read or taught Korematsu v. [read post]
15 Apr 2020, 9:35 am by Casey Quinlan
He is a former service officer with the State Department and now a risk-assessment and foreign-policy consultant. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 5:34 am by Stefanie Levine
Instead, the court in the next sentence provided what sounds like a prior art argument, stating, "public television channels have used the same basic idea for years. [read post]
1 May 2017, 3:16 am by Lee E. Berlik
By way of illustration, let’s take a quick look at the recent case of Dangerfield v. [read post]
17 May 2022, 12:10 pm by Lawrence Solum
This accords with the Supreme Court’s conclusion in Carson v. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 6:00 am by Wystan M. Ackerman
David Lazarus’ article argues that Microsoft’s action, and the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T v. [read post]