Search for: "ROBINSON v. STATE" Results 941 - 960 of 2,250
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jan 2019, 4:16 am by Edith Roberts
Hyatt, in which the court will consider whether to overrule a precedent that allows a state to be sued in the courts of another state without its consent. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 1:07 pm by CJLF Staff
Supreme Court will take up the issue in February in the case of United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 12:09 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKEmployment Insurer's Reliance on Neurologists' Reports In Denying LTD Benefits Reasonable, Proper Robinson v. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 3:58 am by Edith Roberts
Woodard, which involves a strip-search of a preschool child by a state caseworker. [read post]
1 Sep 2016, 2:03 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The cases in which permission has been granted are as follows: R (Bancoult No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Suffolk Coastal District Council v Hopkins Homes Ltd & Anor; Richborough Estates Partnership LLP & Anor Cheshire East Borough Council R (Cardiff & Vale University Board & Ors) v Ceredigion County Council & Ors Miller & Ors v Ministry of Justice; O’Brien v Ministry of Justice… [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 7:30 am by Don Cruse
(No. 17-0905) Arbitration •  Local Immunity In re Comaneche Turner, as Natural Parent and Next Friend of M.T., a minor (No. 18-0102) Discovery •  Med Mal Nathan Robinson and Misti Robinson, individually and as Representatives of All Persons Similarly Situated v. [read post]
17 Dec 2007, 11:17 pm
Robinson, 468 U.S. 992, 1009 (1984); Communities for Equity, 459 F.3d at 685. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 5:15 am
Robinson, 47 Cal.4th 1104, 1133-1135, cert. denied, 131 S.Ct. 72 (2010) (arrest warrant for thirteen-loci DNA profile, which also offered explanation that profile had random match probability essentially incapable of duplication in human population, complied with particularity requirements of Fourth Amendment to United States Constitution and California Constitution); State v. [read post]