Search for: "Perez v. State"
Results 781 - 800
of 1,164
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Apr 2018, 4:36 am
Lundgren, in which the justices considered tribal immunity from state-court actions to adjudicate title to land, and United States v. [read post]
9 Jun 2014, 4:12 am
” At Federal Regulations Advisor, Leland Beck predicts that the Court will grant review in Perez v. [read post]
1 Jun 2024, 3:40 am
Video below: Thousands take part in LGBTQ+ Pride march in Jerusalem Since Roe v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 6:47 am
United States, 16-8997, United States v. [read post]
4 Apr 2010, 12:25 pm
State v. [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 9:24 am
Dove v. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 6:46 am
Perez (which we discussed last week in the Community). [read post]
1 Aug 2010, 9:39 pm
Perez Garcia v. [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 12:57 pm
(Perez, Techcrunch). [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 5:38 pm
BAIRD, Respondent. 3rd District.Mandamus -- Denial -- Appeals -- Belated -- Appellate court has no authority to grant belated appeal in civil proceeding or to grant belated certiorari reviewWILSON PEREZ, Petitioner, v. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 6:36 am
Scism v. [read post]
28 Jan 2023, 7:32 am
The state and its instrumentalities tend to be risk averse--the essence of the ideology of compliance based governmentality. [read post]
22 Feb 2022, 5:57 am
Plaintiff is a Black lawyer who worked for a state agency. [read post]
29 Jan 2010, 8:49 am
Work may be considered as ongoing during a short lapse of time necessary to conduct tests designed to assure proper performance where such testing is an essential element of the work by the insured (see Perez v New York City Hous. [read post]
22 Aug 2010, 9:05 am
(See U.S. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 7:44 pm
Perez-Guererro v. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 12:22 pm
In the 2012 case of United States v. [read post]
30 Mar 2008, 7:47 am
It has decided every case it heard in November except for United States v. [read post]
17 Nov 2023, 7:36 am
” In other words, after the US Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Perez v. [read post]
27 Dec 2007, 11:26 am
Yesterday CAAF docketed two certified issues in an Air Force case:WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS APPLIED THE CORRECT STANDARD OF REVIEW WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION WHEN HE DENIED THE DEFENSE MOTION FOR A SANITY BOARD.WHETHER THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED BY FINDING THE MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS DISCRETION WHEN HE DENIED APPELLANT'S REQUEST FOR A SANITY BOARD FINDING HE HAD NOT MET HIS BURDEN OF FACTUAL PERSUASION TO JUSTIFY… [read post]
