Search for: "State v. Chance"
Results 4441 - 4460
of 10,732
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Oct 2013, 10:05 am
Agency Co. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2025, 1:47 pm
Judge Ruiz just issued his formal order in United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 7:12 am
Gorsuch wrote an opinion in 2008 in US v. [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 9:53 am
One influential decision, Malewicz v. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 8:37 am
INA § 212(a)(6)(A)(i) states that “An alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled . . . is inadmissible”, and the BIA held in Matter of V-X-, 26 I&N Dec. 147 (BIA 2013) , that a grant of asylum is not an “admission” for these purposes, leaving asylees subject to the grounds of inadmissibility (although with the proviso that they cannot be removed unless their asylum status is terminated). [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 2:11 pm
Short of a trial on the merits, there could be additional motions for summary judgment, but there might also be a settlement.POSSIBLE SUPREME COURT REVIEW Barring a prompt resolution of the dispute by settlement, however, there is a good chance that the case will first be taken to the Texas Supreme Court, and if the high court agrees to hear it, it is likely that one or more of the legal issues might get decided differently by the court that has the last word on matters of Texas… [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 10:55 pm
In Amtower v. [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 11:49 am
Then there was State v. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 2:27 am
In Markle v. [read post]
1 Sep 2008, 11:19 am
Haas claims the Indiana Supreme Court exceeded its authority under the Indiana Constitution when it established the loss of chance doctrine in the case of Mayhue v. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 8:40 pm
Long v. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 8:40 am
King v. [read post]
10 Oct 2022, 6:00 pm
[1] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25. [2] Companies Act 2006, section 172. [3] Companies Act 2006, section 172(3). [4] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2019] EWCA Civ 112. [5] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25 [7] (Reed LJ). [6] Companies Act 2006, Part 23. [7] https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2019-0046.html [8] https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2019-0046.html [9] (n 4). [10] BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022] UKSC 25… [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 6:35 pm
After all, Missouri v. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 9:30 pm
A quarter century later, in 1992, the Court had a chance to reconsider its earlier ruling in a case called Quill v. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 1:22 pm
The US Supreme Court Tuesday heard oral arguments in Merrill v. [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 4:43 pm
Along with it, he filed a petition for review (Muhammad v. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 8:20 am
U.S. (10-5400) — authority of federal judge to impose a longer prison sentence to assure that the convicted individual has a chance for rehabilitation Microsoft v. i4i Partnership (10-290) – proof required to challenge the validity of a patent (Chief Justice Roberts is recused) Tuesday, April 19: American Electric Power v. [read post]
29 May 2018, 7:23 am
Illum v. [read post]
14 Dec 2007, 1:25 pm
Sullivan v. [read post]
