Search for: "State v. First Judicial District Court"
Results 8341 - 8360
of 9,094
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Apr 2009, 7:14 am
Co. v. [read post]
28 Apr 2009, 6:19 am
First, he argued that the Second Circuit’s decision conflicted with the Court’s decision in First National Bank in St. [read post]
25 Apr 2009, 9:11 pm
In United States v. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 10:10 am
The case of TA v. [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 12:54 pm
District Court in Boston agreed. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 9:54 pm
Therefore, the district court properly denied the motion to suppress. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 12:48 pm
But the fact nonetheless is that the definition of "customer" which excludes feeder fund investors is not in the SIPA statute, but goes back, as near as I can tell, to the 2d Circuit court of appeals opinion in early 1976 in SIPC v. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 11:52 am
U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2009 Kansas Judicial Review v. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 11:48 am
Thus, the first factor of the judicial estoppel analysis does not favor estoppel. [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 6:02 am
Flores, No. 08-294 (consolidated with Arizona State Speaker v. [read post]
19 Apr 2009, 8:52 pm
Union of India (1989), the Madras High Court, in M/s Inderpuri General Stores v. [read post]
18 Apr 2009, 12:00 pm
District Court in Bridgeport, Connecticut granting plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Counsel . [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 3:23 pm
An old Supreme Judicial Court case, Commonwealth v. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 1:25 pm
On April 3, 2009, the District Court for Colorado entered a groundbreaking copyright decision, treading on new judicial territory by directly applying the First Amendment to invalidate a provision of the Copyright Act. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 9:16 am
It went on to find that the district court rule barred the webcast that the Judicial Council wasn't required to give notice of its resolution, and that the Judicial Conference resolution, although not binding, was entitled to great deference.The court held that there were no constitutional issues involved.In a concurring opinion, Judge Lipez stated that the rule should be reexamined in light of technological advances since its adoption.April… [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 9:41 pm
Here is what the court stated. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 5:20 am
Trial courts in Pennsylvania (particularly the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania) continue their organic development of the "gist of the action" doctrine in the absence of explicit guidance from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.* The latest comes from EDPA Judge Jan E. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 4:54 am
The following is that part of Chapter Law 56 2009 of the State of New York which relates to Rockefeller drug reform legislation. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 4:38 am
Attorneys Office for the Northern District of Mississippi. [read post]
12 Apr 2009, 4:23 pm
In Gentry v. [read post]
