Search for: "Bounds v. State" Results 7101 - 7120 of 9,710
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jul 2011, 11:58 am by WSLL
If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance] Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court Case Name: Elk Ridge Lodge, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 8:52 am by Expert Witness Guru
ISP Technologies, Inc., 259 F.3d 924, 929 (8th Cir. 2001) (emphasis added), but “[t]here is less need for the gatekeeper to keep the gate when the gatekeeper is keeping the gate only for himself,” United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 9:46 pm by Fiona de Londras
Indeed, some years ago the International Court of Justice had found a violation of the VCCR in relation to a group of people of whom Garcia was a member in the case of Avena v United States. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 12:21 pm by David Stewart
Would a federal court consider itself bound by that decision as a matter of common law? [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 3:43 am by Fiona de Londras
  The Convention is a constitutional instrument of European public order (see Loizidou v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 12:28 pm by The Legal Blog
BhandariSupreme Court of IndiaJustice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Deepak Varma, in Ramrameshwari Devi & Ors. v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 4:30 am
Public policy and arbitration awards Correctional Officers PBA v State, 94 NY2d 321 Edward Kuhnel, a State correctional officer, was suspended from duty and served with disciplinary charges after the Department of Correctional Services learned that he flew a Nazi flag from the front porch of his home on December 10, 1996 -- the 55th anniversary of Hitler's declaration of war on the United States. [read post]
2 Jul 2011, 10:32 am by Schachtman
Marianne Bowler used the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 5:32 pm by Douglas Melcher
 The division acknowledged that its holding is inconsistent with the law of a majority of jurisdictions but stated that, as a division of the Court of Appeals, it was bound pursuant to M.A.P. v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 4:25 pm
  [T]he recent decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Monsanto v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 11:01 am
EU Member States are then invited to make observations on the case. [read post]