Search for: "Grant v. State"
Results 7841 - 7860
of 61,338
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 May 2007, 6:27 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 1:44 pm
The attorney moved to dismiss both counts on the basis that the woman failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. [read post]
31 Dec 2011, 9:20 pm
State v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 4:47 pm
The Court (Los Angeles Superior, Judge White) granted the motion: First, the court concluded that the holding of Fitz-Gerald v. [read post]
15 May 2023, 9:28 am
The Court of Appeals granted review of the choice of law issue and the question of whether the trial court properly applied the Supreme Court of Georgia’s decision in Auld v. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 4:56 am
The Supreme Court declined to grant cert in Salazar-Limon v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 8:17 am
Aristocrat Techs. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 2:29 pm
Supreme Court issued its much anticipated opinions in Jesner v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 5:40 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 9:20 pm
Yesterday, Virginia's Court of Appeals made clear that such a requirement is met when the defense files a demand, and does not require the defense to have the witness subpoenaed. blank">Grant v. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 10:29 am
Earlier this month, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a unanimous decision upholding a circuit court’s ruling in SEC v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 4:04 am
R. and H. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 6:41 am
") AC31920 - State v. [read post]
5 Mar 2021, 8:15 am
The Court granted certiorari on December 11, 2020.AG argument. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 11:08 am
United States Supreme Court Closes 2023 Term appeared first on Gibbons Law Alert. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 11:08 am
United States Supreme Court Closes 2023 Term appeared first on Gibbons Law Alert. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 11:08 am
United States Supreme Court Closes 2023 Term appeared first on Gibbons Law Alert. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 5:18 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 2:06 am
State v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 12:24 pm
The Court’s appetite for more of this dish appears to be notably sharp in Janus: in considering certiorari, the justices took the relatively unusual step of inviting the Solicitor General to express the views of the United States on whether to hear the case; then when the SG recommended denying certiorari, the justices took the highly unusual step of granting it anyway. [read post]
