Search for: "Davis v. THE STATE"
Results 4581 - 4600
of 6,166
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2012, 10:28 am
The case was Doe v. [read post]
10 May 2011, 3:34 pm
When the Court turned to the second case, Virginia v. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 8:32 am
Remember United States v. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 4:00 am
An intersting recent exception is State v. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 3:32 pm
“They are the patent examiners....They are paid by the United States of America. [read post]
28 Jan 2020, 5:14 am
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
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]
26 Aug 2018, 3:51 pm
McCarthy v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 2:53 am
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]
11 Aug 2016, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court’s announcement in New York Times v. [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
Sandoz Inc., 15-1195), and cases involving trial before nonlawyer judges (Davis v. [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 11:26 am
L., Davis, D. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:28 am
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
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
""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]
18 Apr 2012, 6:00 am
Davis v. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 6:00 am
Davis v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 11:31 pm
McCleskey v. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 3:52 am
about the Supreme Court’s decision in State v. [read post]
