Search for: "STATE v COUNTS"
Results 7681 - 7700
of 17,258
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2015, 1:46 am
In Souza v. [read post]
22 May 2015, 9:46 pm
In Souza v. [read post]
21 May 2015, 12:22 pm
Supreme Court decided United States v. [read post]
21 May 2015, 10:19 am
” Perhaps unsurprisingly, Barnes was found guilty of, among other things, two counts of first-degree murder. [read post]
21 May 2015, 7:53 am
See Seitz v. [read post]
21 May 2015, 6:30 am
The Supreme Court just decided a case called Young v. [read post]
20 May 2015, 7:04 pm
Two of the decisions come from the Northern District of California: Opperman v. [read post]
20 May 2015, 3:20 pm
54 A.D.3d 883 864 N.Y.S.2d 111 2008 NY Slip Op 7024 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. [read post]
20 May 2015, 1:58 pm
95 N.Y.2d 368 740 N.E.2d 1075 718 N.Y.S.2d 1 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent-Appellant, v. [read post]
20 May 2015, 1:39 pm
In a 48-page complaint, filed by trademark lawyers for Plaintiff, those claims and others are made: • Count I: Federal Trademark Infringement• Count II: Federal Unfair Competition• Count III: Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act• Count IV: Breach of Fiduciary Duty• Count V: Breach of Tiffany's Agreement• Count VI: Tortious Interference with Contract• Count VII: Tortious Interference… [read post]
20 May 2015, 7:36 am
Criminal procedure — Motion to suppress evidence — Recorded telephone conversation Following a jury trial in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, David Glenn Seal (“Seal”), appellant, was convicted of child sexual abuse, four counts of third-degree sex offense, and six counts of second-degree sex offense. [read post]
20 May 2015, 6:50 am
It cited its own 2006 decision in State v. [read post]
19 May 2015, 6:45 am
The Court granted one new case: Campbell-Ewald Co. v. [read post]
19 May 2015, 2:20 am
However, the Court stated that the wide ambit of these sections could be managed by: (i) the prosecution only adding parasitic counts to substantive ones where there was a proper public purpose; and (ii) courts using their powers to discourage inappropriate use of the POCA Provisions to prosecute conduct which is sufficiently covered by substantive offences. [read post]
18 May 2015, 3:19 pm
34 A.D.3d 850 824 N.Y.S.2d 684 2006 NY Slip Op 9024 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 1:45 pm
But whereas Justice Stephen Breyer’s opinion for the Court in Coleman v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:10 am
In a recent products liability/workplace injury case, Elsheref v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:08 am
United States wasn’t really in doubt. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:01 am
United States. [read post]
18 May 2015, 9:12 am
After oral argument, the outcome in Henderson v. [read post]
