Search for: "Grant v. People" Results 461 - 480 of 16,996
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jun 2009, 5:58 am
The plaintiffs' motion to exclude the proposed expert testimony of former Grateful Dead lyricist John Perry Barlow has been granted, in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. [read post]
20 Sep 2023, 7:13 am by Kluwer Patent blogger
Earlier, an ex parte PI order was granted by the UPC Local Division Dusseldorf in June 2023 (ORD_ 541204/2023, in the case of myStromer AG v Revolt Zycling AG), The order in the 10x Genomics case was issued yesterday by Presiding Judge Matthias Zigann at the Munich local division of the UPC. [read post]
29 May 2009, 11:41 am
And if I were the Court of Appeal, I'd both grant such a motion as well as make such an amendment sua sponte. [read post]
10 Sep 2009, 6:59 pm by Brian Shiffrin
As you know, it has long been held that counsel fails to preserve for appellate review legal insufficiency claims when he has failed to raise the issue in a specific TOD motion (see, People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]). [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 9:30 am
 Notwithstanding his right to bail under the Eighth Amendment.)So the trial court grants Miranda the right to represent himself, and the case goes to trial. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 1:25 pm
On September 24, 2018, the trial court granted appellant 36 months’ formal probation on the condition that he serve one year in county jail with credit for time served. [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 12:57 am by INFORRM
The grant of a privacy injunction in the case of AMC v News Group Newspapers ([2015] EWHC 2361 (QB)) has unleashed a deluge of largely inaccurate media comment worthy of the “super injunction spring” of 2011. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 4:15 pm by INFORRM
Jack Gilbert, Lead Litigation Counsel for Facebook, explained that Facebook generally takes a neutral position on applications to identify people behind pages or profiles on their network. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 11:50 pm
Even if it may well not be around all that long: given the significant sea change in California sentencing that it presages, I wouldn't be surprised if the California Supreme Court grants review -- or, perhaps more likely, depublishes the opinion (a distinct possibility given that Justice McAdams ends up affirming the sentence below on the ground that this particular defendant admitted the prior juvenile offense).Moreover, the timing was interesting: I doubt that Justice McAdams… [read post]