Search for: "Jones v. State Bar (1989)" Results 21 - 40 of 90
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Feb 2019, 12:35 pm by admin
This paper presents a survey of federal and state court decisions on these two questions, hoping to offer some guidance to practitioners. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 4:00 am by Administrator
”[72] Justice L’Heureux-Dubé, however, did not agree that an expression stated in the positive (i.e., a “significant contributing cause”) meant the same thing as one stated in the negative (i.e., “not a trivial cause”). [read post]
3 Nov 2018, 9:17 am by MBettman
R. 12(B)(6) as time barred; the NCAA also moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 4:20 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Stated otherwise, a plaintiff may not assert a claim that is entirely based on the expert’s prior testimony — and nothing more — but may assert a claim that is viable apart from, but supported by, that testimony (see De Lourdes Torres v Jones, 26 NY3d at 770 [precluding the subjection of a witness to potential liability for prior testimony [*3]”alone”]). [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 12:21 pm
 The petitioner argued that his claim was barred by Heck v. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 10:59 am by Margaret Wood
He was a member of the bars of the state of Ohio and the District of Columbia; beginning his legal career as an associate at the Cleveland Ohio firm of Jones, Day, Cockley & Reavis. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 6:51 am by Jeff Welty
App. 1989) (generally adopting the view that officers may photograph anything in plain view, and collecting cases); State v. [read post]