Search for: "State v. Record"
Results 7181 - 7200
of 43,401
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Dec 2010, 3:13 pm
United States v. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 8:32 pm
The case is designated EPIC v. [read post]
10 Jun 2009, 11:47 am
The Supremes have docketed a cert petition in Stephens v. [read post]
10 Mar 2009, 1:14 pm
We filed a cert petition today asking the Supreme Court to review CAAF's holding in United States v. [read post]
20 Mar 2007, 10:40 am
The 11th Circuit reissued Thompson v. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 4:46 pm
United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981). [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 8:00 am
Unzueta v. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 3:54 am
In a subsequent proceeding, State Supreme Court Judge Paula Omansky determined that the Authority had adequately respond[ed] to the court’s prior order. [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 5:06 am
In National Assn of Broadcasters v. [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 6:00 am
Mackie had no prior criminal record. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 6:23 am
State v. [read post]
15 Oct 2009, 5:52 am
Clites v. [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 8:05 am
Janine Cox won in State v. [read post]
2 Feb 2014, 3:30 pm
The Recorder relied in particular (see judgment, [38] and [43]) on the judgment of Pill LJ in Ahmed v Leicester City Council [2007] EWCA Civ 843 at [18], [22] and [23] and on paragraph 6.15 of the Statutory Code which I have set out at [7]. [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 5:34 am
State v. [read post]
24 Nov 2008, 3:34 pm
Thanks to How Appealing, I saw this article in the latest issue of the Harvard Law Record headlined "Profs: District of Columbia v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 6:47 am
On June 17, 2010 the United States Supreme Court issued the highly anticipated decision City of Ontario v. [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 2:19 pm
Judge Clifton authors the opinion and holds that, no, the exclusionary rule indeed applies here because even though there may have been a violation of state law, that's not what the warrant was based on: a state judge issues warrants for state violations, and for that, the warrant here was improper. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 6:31 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 8:53 am
Finally, the panel stated that even though the knowledge Sinele gained on the job would undoubtedly help him in future negotiations with sweetener manufacturers, including ADM, such knowledge is one of the things employees are free to take and use in later pursuits, especially if they do not take the form of written records, compilations, or analyses. [read post]
