Search for: "State v. Levine"
Results 501 - 520
of 1,753
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Apr 2011, 4:38 pm
See United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 9:53 am
The trial court entered final judgment against Rohrmoos, stating: 1. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 11:01 pm
In 1978, the Illinois Supreme Court case of Green v. [read post]
6 Apr 2011, 9:52 am
Relying on People v Sexton, 458 Mich 43, 53 (1998) the Court stated that Justice Brickley’s opinion actually expressed the “ultimate holding” of Bender. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 7:28 pm
In Achord v. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 5:00 am
Levine. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 10:30 am
--Gordon v. [read post]
14 Jul 2008, 5:00 am
We've said it before, and we'll say it again: Plaintiffs will now regularly plead that their state law claims against device manufacturers run "parallel" to the FDA's requirements and so are not preempted under Riegel v. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 11:44 am
Supreme Court is set to decide the case of Wyeth v. [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 2:33 am
Levine [read post]
29 Jan 2007, 5:25 am
For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision in Levin v. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 12:41 pm
Levine, in mind -- we'll come back to it later. [read post]
9 May 2017, 11:11 am
The case, U.S. v. [read post]
20 May 2015, 1:58 pm
95 N.Y.2d 368 740 N.E.2d 1075 718 N.Y.S.2d 1 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent-Appellant, v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 8:03 am
In Special v. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 2:17 am
The similarity must be confusing to an “objective bystander,” so stated by the minority Panel in Open Society Institute v. [read post]
22 Aug 2014, 9:22 am
In Ray v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
" Further, as the decision in Walton v New York State Department of Correctional Servs., 25 AD3d 999, modified, 8 NY3d at 191, notes, "an individual is not required to exhaust the available administrative remedy where such action would constitute an exercise in futility. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
" Further, as the decision in Walton v New York State Department of Correctional Servs., 25 AD3d 999, modified, 8 NY3d at 191, notes, "an individual is not required to exhaust the available administrative remedy where such action would constitute an exercise in futility. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 1:47 am
As for Wyeth v. [read post]