Search for: "Patterson, Appeal of" Results 681 - 700 of 871
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Mar 2016, 6:56 pm by James S. Friedman, LLC
  The firm also represents defendants who seek to appeal their convictions to the the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 7:58 pm
Such problems were addressed by the Court of Appeals three years ago in  Argo Corp.. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
 This is an appeal by the BBC from the decision of the Inner House [2013] CSIH 43. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 7:33 am by Nathan Meyer
Decker, 196 Ariz. 239, 241 (App. 2000), amended (Feb. 22, 2000), the Court of Appeals indicated a personal injury plaintiff must prove medical bills are “necessary and reasonable” when it favorably cited Patterson v. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 7:33 am by Nathan Meyer
Decker, 196 Ariz. 239, 241 (App. 2000), amended (Feb. 22, 2000), the Court of Appeals indicated a personal injury plaintiff must prove medical bills are “necessary and reasonable” when it favorably cited Patterson v. [read post]
4 May 2007, 12:29 pm
They wrote: Striking the defective exceptions, however, may impair the Respondent's right under Section 10(e) of the Act to appeal. [read post]
15 Mar 2017, 11:33 am by Jordan Brunner
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:05 pm
A claim of double jeopardy is sometimes encountered in efforts to suppress a disciplinary action in situations were the charges reflect the same acts or omissions that were the subject of counseling memoranda or performance evaluations.The courts have rejected this theory.** In Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98, the Court of Appeals said that including charges concerning performance that were addressed in a counseling memorandum was not “double jeopardy. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 3:45 am
In Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98 the Court of Appeals said that including charges concerning performance that were addressed in a counseling memorandum was not “double jeopardy. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 11:12 pm by Dwight Sullivan
Pennsylvania, 477 U.S. 79 (1986); Patterson v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 8:41 am by Adam Thierer
  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had struck down a California law which prohibited the sale or rental of “violent video games” to minors, but California appealed and the SCOTUS took up the issue. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 12:30 pm by Jason Rantanen
Patterson, Reestablishing the Doctrine of Patent Exhaustion, 2007 Patently-O Patent L.J. 38 Arti K. [read post]