Search for: "The Florida Bar v. Williams"
Results 41 - 60
of 497
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jun 2016, 9:01 am
In Williams v. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 8:40 am
However, we called the Florida Bar. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 2:20 pm
THE FLORIDA BAR, RESPONDENT. [read post]
19 Jun 2015, 8:26 am
The Florida Bar (5-4 per Roberts for plurality). [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 3:48 pm
Dugger, 676 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 1996)..... 2, 3, 5, 6 Williams v. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 11:42 am
The Florida Bar. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 9:41 am
The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that Florida’s capital sentencing scheme was unconstitutional, in Hurst v. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 2:20 pm
Lucie County, Florida, appears to have raised the issue at bar. [read post]
12 Jan 2008, 7:01 am
GRUBER Florida Bar No. 0330541 Assistant CCC PETER CANNON Florida Bar No. 019710 DAPHNEY E. [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]
6 Feb 2013, 8:40 am
However, we called the Florida Bar. [read post]
11 Apr 2018, 9:32 am
Florida Bar (2015). [read post]
4 May 2015, 10:18 am
The Supreme Court’s opinion in Williams – Yulee v. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 11:42 am
“Consecutive sentencing of mandatory minimum imprisonment terms for multiple firearm offenses is impermissible if the offenses arose from the same criminal episode and a firearm was merely possessed but not discharged,” the court said, citing the Florida Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Williams v. [read post]
20 Jan 2010, 12:26 pm
He was also the first Hispanic-American president of the Florida Bar. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 4:52 pm
The case is Williams-Yulee v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 4:51 pm
The case is Williams-Yulee v. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 2:31 pm
The Supreme Court’s decision in Williams-Yulee v. [read post]
4 May 2015, 1:36 pm
On Wednesday in Williams Yulee v. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 2:46 am
Accordingly, that branch of the defendants' motion which was to dismiss the legal malpractice cause of action should have been granted (see Williams v Lindenberg, 24 AD3d 434, 434-435). [read post]
