Search for: "Case v. People" Results 5841 - 5860 of 52,001
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Oct 2009, 10:22 am
More fun, of course, since it's (1) an actual trial, and (2) you're working with people instead of boxes. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 6:10 pm by IP Dragon
Their argument that the California court had no jurisdiction over the case was dismissed by Judge Gary A. [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 7:00 am
Recently, the California Supreme Court stated, "even if acting on an anonymous tip, police may knock on the door of a residence, speak with the occupant, and request permission to enter and search" People v. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 10:22 am by John Gregory
The people who generated the spreadsheets were available to testify in person about how they had run the queries: Animal Welfare International Inc. v. [read post]
14 May 2009, 2:33 pm
Lots of people are going to make up their mind right there -- without any of the facts at all -- about who should win.Let me nonetheless describe the case for you. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 1:55 pm by Eugene Volokh
(Eugene Volokh) I blogged about the case a year ago, and now there’s an appellate court decision in it, People v. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 8:59 am by Sabrina I. Pacifici
” WaPo What does the Supreme Court’s NLRB ruling mean for hundreds of labor cases? [read post]
17 Mar 2024, 6:00 am by Mary B. McCord
Mary McCord is one of the counsel representing former superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services Maria Vullo in National Rifle Association v. [read post]
11 Oct 2018, 12:22 pm by Heather Donkers
He arrived at this result using the same principles from another case, R v Jackson, that he had decided earlier this year. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 9:44 am by admin
Our friend and colleague Marius Adomnica (Gratl & Company) has written this good case note on the recent Tim Hortons class action case in Ontario: The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently released its reasons striking the Plaintiffs’ claim in Fairview Donut Inc. v. [read post]