Search for: "Hile v State"
Results 581 - 600
of 703
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Nov 2010, 3:56 am
A state Supreme Court judge dismissed Winker’s petition. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 4:30 am
Farina v. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 2:49 am
Meyer v. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 8:34 am
In United States v. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 6:28 am
“Officially, the subjective prong is still viable” in determining if a search was consensual, noted Ric Simmons, but after [the Supreme Court's opinion in United States v. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 9:12 am
[Long Beach Unit], 8 NY3d 465Article V, Section 6 of New York State’s Constitution mandates that appointments and promotions in the civil service of the State and its political subdivisions "shall be made according to merit and fitness to be ascertained, as far as practicable, by examination which, as far as practicable, shall be competitive. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 10:26 am
O’Neill v. [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 9:11 am
Importantly, DEA states that a nurse in a LTCF may act as practitioner’s agent. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 1:07 pm
" Bartlett v. [read post]
27 Sep 2010, 8:50 am
In addition, Greg Stohr of Bloomberg reports on an amicus brief recently filed by nineteen major corporations in Wal-Mart v. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 2:58 am
See generally DeAngelis v. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 11:46 pm
” United States v. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 4:06 pm
See Mastrobuono v. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 7:37 am
Ash v. [read post]
22 Aug 2010, 7:26 pm
State v. [read post]
13 Aug 2010, 2:23 pm
The case of Finkel v. [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 12:51 pm
Specifically, the Circuit Court noted that “[w]hile we agree…that Pennsylvania law empowers a court to enjoin the threatened disclosure of trade secrets without requiring a plaintiff to show that disclosure is inevitable, we do not consider that an injunction granted absent such a showing was issued pursuant to the ‘inevitable disclosure doctrine’. [read post]
31 Jul 2010, 3:12 am
State v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 12:02 pm
t of Consumer Affairs v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 8:21 am
In a recent opinion in People v. [read post]
