Search for: "Davis v. State" Results 4581 - 4600 of 6,176
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 May 2011, 3:34 pm by Lyle Denniston
  When the Court turned to the second case, Virginia v. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 8:32 am by John Elwood
Remember United States v. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 4:00 am by Jeff Welty
An intersting recent exception is State v. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 3:32 pm by Joe Mullin
  “They are the patent examiners....They are paid by the United States of America. [read post]
28 Jan 2020, 5:14 am by Charles Sartain
This decision is only the second application by a state supreme court of the rule of capture to hydraulic fracturing (from Texas, Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 1:14 pm by Amy Howe
ShareThe Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Thursday in what is shaping up to be the biggest election case since its ruling nearly 25 years ago in Bush v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 2:53 am by INFORRM
Judgments The following reserved judgments after public hearings remain outstanding: Woodrow v Johansson, heard 19 January 2012 (HHJ Parkes QC) Miller v Associated Newspapers heard 21 to 25 May 2012 (Sharp J) SKA v CRH, heard 10 and 11 July 2012 (Nicola Davies J) Lord Ashcroft v Foley heard 20 July 2012 (Eady J) [read post]
27 Sep 2008, 1:41 pm
Sep. 26, 2008)(per curiam) (condemnation appeal, State prevails)THE STATE OF TEXAS v. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 7:01 am by John Elwood
Sandoz Inc., 15-1195), and cases involving trial before nonlawyer judges (Davis v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:28 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  Fictional memory, imaginary state of mind, imagined shopping experience—and then we complain that we don’t have ecologically valid evidence! [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 3:44 pm by Venkat
Other State Law Claims: Plaintiffs asserted a slew of other state law claims, the bulk of which fell by the wayside. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 3:45 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
""However, a law firm's "failure to comply with the rules on retainer agreements (22 NYCRR 1215.1) does not preclude it from suing to recover legal fees for the services it provided" (Miller v Nadler, 60 AD3d 499, 500 [Sup Ct New York County 2009], citing Egnotovich v Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP, 55 AD3d 462, 464 [1st Dept 2008]; Nicoll & Davis LLP v Ainetchi, 52 AD3d 412 [1st Dept 2008]; Seth Rubenstein, P.C. v… [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 3:52 am
about the Supreme Court’s decision in State v. [read post]