Search for: "STATE v. HUNTER" Results 481 - 500 of 1,280
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Apr 2016, 2:55 pm by Joel O'Malley
” The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision, Orthofix, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 5:20 am by Michael C. Dorf
But even using something like the Court's premises, the bounty hunters (in Justice Sotomayor's phrase) who enforce S.B. 8 should be understood as state actors because, suffering no personal injury themselves, they stand in the shoes of the state. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 3:01 pm
So holds the Washington Court of Appeals in today’s City of Seattle v. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 2:20 am by Caitlin Stickler, Olswang LLP
” (Jacob LJ in Mastercigars Direct Ltd v Hunters & Frankau Ltd (2007)) However, as the Supreme Court acknowledges, whilst this policy might be economically controversial, it is legally well-established. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 3:29 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Contrary to petitioners' contention, however, the petition fails to state a cause of action for fraud or constructive fraud against either HSBC or respondent law firm because it fails to make a "factually supported allegation" of misrepresentation (Pope v Saget, 29 AD3d 437, 441, lv denied 8 NY3d 803; see Simmons v Washing Equip. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 12:08 pm by Sandi Zellmer
Alaska hunter John Sturgeon is asking the Supreme Court to slam the door on the National Park Service’s ability to apply its nationwide hovercraft ban to the Nation River within the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 12:00 am by Sex Offender Issues
Hunter's dissenting opinion, and held that STATE v. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 9:00 am by Guest Blogger
Hunter referred to the case of LSUC v Joseph in detailing the inherent dangers of engaging in sexual relationships with clients. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 6:12 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Furthermore, in the third action, plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for fraud, as he did not sufficiently allege out-of-pocket losses that stemmed from any alleged fraud, but rather, asserted only speculative losses (see Lama Holding Co. v Smith Barney, 88 NY2d 413, 421 [1996]). [read post]