Search for: "Case v. People"
Results 4681 - 4700
of 52,001
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jul 2016, 2:20 pm
In a fair number of cases, people are denied the first time they apply, but then are approved on their second go-around. [read post]
18 May 2017, 4:21 pm
On May 18, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear an appeal in an important case that could further define the nature and extent of the Crown’s duty to consult Aboriginal people, including the previously unresolved question as to whether the Crown’s duty to consult Aboriginal people can be triggered by legislative action. [read post]
30 Oct 2020, 2:16 pm
Several weeks later, it denied a similar request involving Nevada’s directive capping religious gatherings at 50 people in Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 6:00 pm
The Court further explained that Husband didn’t do much to help his own case. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 6:00 pm
The Court further explained that Husband didn’t do much to help his own case. [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 12:26 pm
Hall v. [read post]
27 Sep 2023, 7:08 am
No court case better exemplifies the problem than the notorious decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. [read post]
27 Sep 2023, 7:08 am
No court case better exemplifies the problem than the notorious decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. [read post]
7 Jan 2012, 9:20 pm
People v. [read post]
5 Aug 2016, 5:36 am
Magyar Jeti Zrt v Hungary is a new important pending case. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 5:41 pm
A short time later, Justice Sonia Sotomayor asks how this case is different from Leonard v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 6:01 pm
Our clients are “people” and not “cases” or “files. [read post]
27 Jan 2020, 9:28 am
” Case citation: Woodhull Freedom Foundation v. [read post]
10 May 2023, 10:30 am
” Id., citing, Kurzcaba v. [read post]
1 May 2010, 6:14 am
Dees v. [read post]
1 Jun 2009, 12:35 pm
The Court of Appeals held in People v Grajales (8 NY3d 861 [2007]) that the People are not required to give 710.30 notice of identifications of the defendant made during a photo identification procedure, such as an array The Court reasoned that because testimony regarding photographic identification procedures is not admissible, the People cannot "intend to offer at trial" such testimony. [read post]
18 May 2017, 10:28 am
(People v. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 6:04 am
Weeks v. [read post]
13 Apr 2010, 7:44 pm
The Ontario Divisional Court is going to hear an appeal of the Warman v Wilkins-Fournier case, in which the issue is whether an internet intermediary (here a blog site) must disclose the names of people alleged to have defamed someone. [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 7:36 am
United States v. [read post]
