Search for: "In re A. V."
Results 8241 - 8260
of 62,944
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Oct 2008, 2:56 pm
In Re Seneca Investments, LLC, 2008 WL 4329230 (Del. [read post]
8 Oct 2022, 8:06 am
See Douglas v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 9:15 pm
Here is the abstract:In 2004, Crawford v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 1:09 pm
It's just that other 145-page books would likely be even more rewarding to read.Unless you're a true death penalty and/or federal habeas nerd. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 1:24 pm
Even if you're right. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 6:48 pm
"Wholly apart from the Court of Appeal's expressly laudatory statement about Judge Wiley ("the experienced and highly regarded trial judge"), the Court of Appeal also recognizes that the issue was a complex one and the procedural setting of the dispute far from ideal.In short, if you're a trial judge who's going to get reversed by the Court of Appeal, something like this is probably how you want it to happen. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 11:34 am
" Unless we're adding AKAs to every single lawsuit, which just seems weird.Anyway. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 12:57 pm
You're now seeing the resurgence of a solid core of very conservative judges. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 11:38 am
On the theory that you generally don't use the first names of the parties in the first sentence of the opinion unless you're going to find in their favor. [read post]
21 May 2021, 1:41 pm
They're just talking about the "purposes" of the bill in general. [read post]
12 Nov 2018, 1:00 pm
And we're only now on the first federal appeal. [read post]
1 Apr 2020, 1:09 pm
" (That's a gang challenge, essentially asking the person if they're with a rival gang.)Step Three: The person, who's not a gang member, accurately responds: "I'm not from nowhere. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 1:42 pm
The other side files a motion, you oppose it, you conclude that there's absolutely no way you're going to lose the thing, and then lo and behold, the trial court grants the motion.Here's an example.Plaintiff files a putative class action that says that Newegg advertises "discounts" off of "regular" prices that are essentially fake. [read post]
7 Nov 2012, 9:45 am
Since you're reading something on the Internet, I thought it appropriate to highlight Justice Rushing's contemporary thoughts about this media:"The Internet contains, or more accurately is connected to and thus capable of conveying, a large and growing part of all of the recordable information in existence. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 10:34 am
(To be clear, we're talking about this Howard Stern -- i.e., the "Anna Nicole Smith" one -- not the "King of All Media" Howard Stern.)Mr. [read post]
20 Nov 2019, 2:05 pm
One for which we're not even approaching a solution.So we use potentially lengthy periods of incarceration. [read post]
7 Jun 2021, 5:06 pm
You're going to be hard pressed to persuade someone that, at this point, taking a 28-year old off the street until he's 60 or so (assuming time off for good behavior) is unconstitutionally excessive.On an only tangentially related note, I had to reflect on my own mental competence when I stumbled over a portion of Justice Murray's opinion. [read post]
29 Oct 2015, 7:26 am
In my view, GFO is not asking for a determination of rights that depend on the interpretation of the Regulation but a re-writing of that Regulation in a manner that would permit the effects of the Regulation to be delayed to its advantage. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 12:55 pm
Not exactly what we're trying to protect by a statute that authorizes medical leave when you really need it. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 9:08 am
The issue is whether SLUSA preempts a class action in which the plaintiff-victims allege “(1) that they “purchase[d]” uncovered securities (certificates of deposit that [we]re not traded on any national exchange), but (2) that the defendants falsely told the victims that the uncovered securities were backed by covered securities. [read post]
