Search for: "Street v. State" Results 641 - 660 of 10,444
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Dec 2011, 5:56 am
Category: Recent Decisions;Criminal Opinions Body: Here is today's criminal law Appellate Court opinion:   AC32399, AC32403 - State v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 10:39 am by Hanni Fakhoury
Not to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which issued its long awaited decision in Joffe v. [read post]
3 May 2009, 10:21 pm
You'll recall that when the new, broader standard for government takings came down in Kelo v. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 12:33 am
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard oral arguments in Arizona v. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
UFT had decided not to arbitrate Petitioner's grievance based on undisputed evidence that Petitioner was not between work assignments when she was struck by a car but instead had completed her last assignment of the day and was on her way home and that Petitioner was using her cell phone when crossing the street. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
UFT had decided not to arbitrate Petitioner's grievance based on undisputed evidence that Petitioner was not between work assignments when she was struck by a car but instead had completed her last assignment of the day and was on her way home and that Petitioner was using her cell phone when crossing the street. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 3:54 am by Amy Howe
It has been a week since the Court announced that it would review United States v. [read post]
16 May 2008, 9:31 am
Special defects are defects of the same kind or class as "excavations or obstructions on highways, roads, or streets," Eaton, 573 S.W.2d at 179, that present an "unexpected and unusual danger to ordinary users of roadways," State v. [read post]
16 May 2008, 9:31 am
Special defects are defects of the same kind or class as "excavations or obstructions on highways, roads, or streets," Eaton, 573 S.W.2d at 179, that present an "unexpected and unusual danger to ordinary users of roadways," State v. [read post]