Search for: "Higginson v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 72
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2020, 3:46 am
Supreme Court was petitioned recently to take up Higginson v. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 11:12 am
After the Fifth Circuit heard oral argument in All American Check Cashing, the Fifth Circuit granted the petition for en banc review in Collins v. [read post]
30 Jan 2020, 8:24 am
" Gann v. [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 10:38 am
Higginson also stated that regardless of the decision of the court, the case should be expedited. [read post]
9 Sep 2019, 3:06 pm
The en banc Fifth Circuit has ruled in Collins v. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 5:37 am
At the end of January, an en banc Fifth Circuit heard oral argument in the rehearing of Collins v. [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 9:50 am
Henry v. [read post]
19 Sep 2018, 7:35 am
State of Louisiana Workforce Commission, September 17, 2018, Higginson, S.). [read post]
2 Jun 2018, 4:12 pm
[State of Texas v. [read post]
28 May 2018, 1:42 pm
George, for Plaintiff-Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.Before: SMITH, BARKSDALE, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.STEPHEN A. [read post]
24 May 2018, 6:05 am
That was sufficient to raise a triable issue in Judge Higginson’s view. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 6:09 pm
Perry Homes v Cull. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 10:06 am
In Henry, et al. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2017, 9:30 am
On Oct. 11, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Jesner v. [read post]
11 Sep 2017, 9:18 am
LUCINDA VINE; KRISTY POND, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.PLS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INCORPORATED; PLS LOAN STORE OF TEXAS, INCORPORATED, Defendants-Appellants.No. 16-50847.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.Filed May 19, 2017.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, USDC No. 3:16-CV-31.Before: BARKSDALE, GRAVES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.PER CURIAM.[*]Appellants PLS Financial Services, Inc., and PLS Loan Store of Texas,… [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 2:24 pm
Horton, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Aug 2017, 6:26 am
Judge Higginson wrote separately to concur in the judgment only. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 11:50 am
"In his dissent, Judge Higginson states that he would have remanded the case back to the district court because the Attorney Defendants threatened nonjudicial foreclosure to collect the entirety of a partially time-barred debt in violation of § 1692e(5) of the FDCPA, and implied that the full amount demanded was legally enforceable, in violation of §§ 1692e(2)(A), (10) and 1692f. [read post]
23 May 2017, 2:34 pm
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in United States v. [read post]
