Search for: "Williams v. Baker" Results 481 - 500 of 580
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Mar 2009, 1:26 pm
Williams that a conviction for motor vehicle theft is not a violent felony, making defendant's mandatory minimum sentence for three prior violent felony convictions in error. [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 6:30 am
This is the third in the four-part series from the brain injury case of Gregory Joseph Gagnon, et al. v. [read post]
1 Mar 2009, 9:45 pm
Beerman & Joseph William Singer, Baseline Questions in Legal Reasoning: The Example of Property in Jobs, 23 Ga. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 1:58 am
Among the many lawsuits that have flooded in as part of the subprime and credit crisis litigation wave has been a profusion of lawsuits against the mortgage-backed securities issuers and their securities offering underwriters. [read post]
8 Dec 2008, 12:06 pm
The Scheduled Panel Members are Chief Judge Baker, Judges Crone and Bradford. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 9:00 pm
Baker Hostetler Blog-Tolerant This blog was mentioned on Paul G. [read post]
28 Nov 2008, 10:10 pm
United States v. [read post]
25 Oct 2008, 5:05 pm
Jason Baker    Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit 08a0623n.06 Rene Davey v. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 6:47 pm
Williams means and how that issue has played out in the courts since the decision.Review of what Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
8 Sep 2008, 9:08 am
High Court (Technology and Contruction Court) Makers UK Ltd v London Borough of Camden [2008] EWHC 1836 (TCC) (25 July 2008) E Group Ltd v Baker [2008] EWHC 1994 (TCC) (25 July 2008) Richardson Roofing Company Ltd v Ballast Plc & Ors [2008] EWHC 1806 (TCC) (25 July 2008) Rodrigues v Sokal [2008] EWHC 2005 (TCC) (30 July 2008) Business Environment Bow Lane Ltd v Deanwater Estates Ltd [2008] EWHC 2003 (TCC) (31 July 2008) CJP Builders Ltd… [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 6:23 pm
BAKER, C.J. dissents with opinion: [which begins] Although I very much agree in principle with the result reached by the majority, I believe that we are compelled by Willis v. [read post]