Search for: "Read v. United States" Results 3881 - 3900 of 30,126
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Mar 2010, 2:27 am by staff@mortgagefraudblog.com
Joseph Miller, 63, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, Peter Hartofilis, 33, Flushing, New York, Robert Hofler, 52, Pembroke Pines, Florida, and Steve Vento, 41, Jupiter, Florida, are four new defendants that have been added in the case of United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 9:57 am
In health care fraud trial concerning false billings, computer records of physician's drug company purchases were admissible as business record under FRE 803(6), in United States v. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 1:33 am
Eighth Circuit holds that a curative instruction could not mitigate the informant's unexpected testimony that the defendant told him he had failed a polygraph test, in United States v. [read post]
9 Aug 2018, 9:02 am by The Law Office of Philip D. Cave
As this case demonstrates, the novelty of an assimilative charging decision under Article 134 often wears off during the course of an appeal, Says ACCA in a footnote to United States v. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 5:40 am by Mark S. Humphreys
United Liberty Life Insurance Company, correctly states that life insurance policies typically exclude suicide as an assumed risk. [read post]
20 Nov 2008, 8:01 am
Tenth Circuit reinstates conviction after concluding FRE 606(b) exceptions did not apply and Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury was not violated; Tenth Circuit notes circuit split on whether allegations of juror misconduct on dishonesty during voir dire may be considered, in United States v. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 10:00 am
In failure to pay federal taxes trial, evidence of the defendant's personal expenditures was probative on the issue of willfulness, and her failure to file individual and corporate tax returns and make tax deposits was admissible under FRE 404(b), in United States v. [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 9:12 am
In DUI case, majority concludes that machine-generated data concerning positive test in a blood sample was not a statement of the lab technicians and therefore was not a hearsay statement, since it was not made by a person but a machine analyzing the sample; no Confrontation Clause issues were raised, in United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2016, 2:08 pm by Anthony B. Cavender
Circuit’s 180-page ruling, in United States Telecom Assoc. v. [read post]
26 Nov 2008, 9:05 am
Authentication based on e-mail address, automatic reply to sender, the messages indicated knowledge of matter, and use of nicknames; and testimony concerning phone conversations after e-mail messages were transmitted, in United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 7:05 am by Mark S. Humphreys
The Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act was interpreted by the United States Fifth Circuit in this 2015 opinion. [read post]