Search for: "Herring v. State" Results 5421 - 5440 of 58,225
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Mar 2009, 3:52 am
D.R.'s personal physician had advised her not to return to work due to severe depression and stated that D.R. was "not fit to assume her job duties at [that] time. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 7:53 am
She never requested an accommodation or contacted her employer to state her intention to return to work. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 2:25 pm by Howard Knopf
Pelletier, J.A. states that:[13]           Finally, Ms. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 5:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
Pacific Health Corp., 202 Cal.App.4th 1034 (2012)] and its adoption as a matter of California law of the United States Supreme Court’s analysis in Smith v. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 11:55 am
” In response, the court stated, “Essentially, you’re doing it from a phone in a car, and you can’t use your phone to look at documents and appear in a hearing. [read post]
4 Dec 2018, 12:13 pm
  Usually the defendant doesn't testify in her own defense. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 12:13 pm
"  True that, I guess.)The Court of Appeal not only affirms, but also drops a footnote:  "We assume the trial court and attorney Weisberg have already reported the judicially imposed sanctions to the State Bar of California. [read post]
This is the case where the defendant allegedly shot the victim in both knees after the defendant accompanied a female friend to help her retrieve her dog from her ex-boyfriend, the victim. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 1:00 pm by McNabb Associates, P.C.
ARTICLE V A fugitive criminal shall not be surrendered under the provisions hereof, when, from lapse of time or other lawful cause, according to the laws of the country within the jurisdiction of which the crime was committed, the criminal is exempt from prosecution or punishment for the offense for which the surrender is asked. [read post]
25 Sep 2021, 1:28 pm
In her dissent in the 1983 Akron v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 5:05 am by Rachel Sachs
Jackson filed her brief  in United States v. [read post]
17 May 2017, 5:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
An employee's unreasonably failure to use an employer-provided preventive or remedial apparatus bars the consideration of his or her complaints of unlawful discriminationMagnusson v. [read post]