Search for: "Levell v. State"
Results 6561 - 6580
of 29,835
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2016, 5:24 am
Multifab, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 6:45 am
Supreme Court will rule in the Bilski v. [read post]
14 Aug 2013, 10:08 am
Pursuant to state statute, the local school district imposed its Level II fee on all of the new structure, without credit for any of the square footage demolished to make way for the project. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:19 pm
The standard for showing ineffective assistance of counsel rising to a level that violates a defendant's constitutional rights to such a degree that would require a defendant to obtain a new trial is set forth in the 1984 United States Supreme Court decision of Strickland v. [read post]
2 Sep 2021, 4:30 am
Post 2 (of 2) on Clews v. [read post]
14 Jul 2015, 6:08 am
Stringer v Grand Tappattoo Resort, 2015 CanLII 26124 (ON LRB) [read post]
14 Jul 2015, 6:08 am
Stringer v Grand Tappattoo Resort, 2015 CanLII 26124 (ON LRB) [read post]
14 Feb 2017, 9:47 am
R. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 10:04 am
SB Diversified Products, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 5:19 am
(See, e.g., Cohen v. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 6:27 am
It's a Bowers v. [read post]
2 Sep 2021, 4:30 am
Post 2 (of 2) on Clews v. [read post]
20 Oct 2015, 3:21 am
The SEC’s case alleges the same facts as the parallel criminal action, the defendants stated. [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division rejected the toll collector’s argument that his absences were approved and medically justified and therefore excused for the purposes of maintaining any disciplinary action against him.In Dickinson v New York State Unified Ct. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 10:28 am
Some accounts state that they have shelved the statute and the organisation (see W New). [read post]
22 May 2013, 5:19 pm
The standard for showing ineffective assistance of counsel rising to a level that violates a defendant’s constitutional rights to such a degree that would require a defendant to obtain a new trial is set forth in the 1984 United States Supreme Court decision of Strickland v. [read post]
29 Jun 2020, 6:21 pm
Ultimately, the Supreme Court affirmed the Commonwealth Court’s holding that the retroactivity of the Protz decision dates back to the date of the IRE in the context of a worker’s compensation matter.After reviewing the prior Pennsylvania caselaw on the retroactivity of new law under the circumstances presented in this matter, the Court held that, unless the appellate decision rendering the new law specifically states that it is to be applied prospectively, the new rule of… [read post]
14 Aug 2014, 3:32 pm
It was inspiring on many levels. [read post]
20 Aug 2020, 1:03 pm
United States and United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 5:06 am
Ackerman v. [read post]
