Search for: "State v. Record"
Results 8801 - 8820
of 43,411
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Feb 2015, 7:12 am
Here is the complaint in United States v. $400,000 (W.D. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 8:34 am
Prins submitted a FOIA request to the state police seeking, among other things, the video-recording of the traffic stop. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 11:24 am
State v. [read post]
7 Mar 2023, 7:25 am
In Keveloh v. [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 9:14 pm
As Judge Kahn points out, in United States v. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 3:02 pm
REL, DUKE BENNETT v. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 11:17 am
Earlier this week, a team that included Kevin Russell, Pam Karlan, and the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic filed this Motion to Dismiss or Affirm in No. 07-77, Riley v. [read post]
24 Mar 2023, 10:00 pm
Matter of Digital Forensics Unit v Records Access Officer 2023 NY Slip Op 01476 Decided on March 21, 2023 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. [read post]
24 Mar 2023, 10:00 pm
Matter of Digital Forensics Unit v Records Access Officer 2023 NY Slip Op 01476 Decided on March 21, 2023 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 6:15 am
State v. [read post]
31 May 2011, 5:08 am
" (Engle v. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 5:42 am
Ass’n v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 3:25 am
The record showed that the individuals were “appointed to temporary positions” and such appointments were “on a temporary basis. [read post]
8 Mar 2016, 4:16 am
Other coverage of the summary reversal in V.L. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2013, 4:24 pm
In McQuiggin v. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 6:20 pm
United States v Groos, June 13, 2008.Defendant Groos requested authorization to depose two "foreign witnesses who will help prove that Mr. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 3:00 am
H/T to Alison Frankel for the pointer to the oral arguments in Linde v. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 7:53 am
Summary: Addiction Medicine Expert Witness testimony is allowed because the court ruled that the expert’s testimony will not include a legal opinion Facts: This case (United States v. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 5:05 pm
Lind, No. 12-8027/AR, which is currently pending before CAAF: CCR v. [read post]
