Search for: "Farris v. State"
Results 81 - 100
of 102
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Oct 2007, 4:50 am
Farris, No. 06-6394In an action brought by a disappointed bidder under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 and state law alleging a deprivation of property without due process and violations of Kentucky law covering the award of public contracts, dismissal of the claims is affirmed as: 1) the procedural requirements of state lease procurement law do not afford plaintiff a property interest in getting the state to lease its real property; and 2) the Eleventh Amendment provides… [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 9:00 pm
Rees decision and approved the use of midazolam in 2015 in Glossip v. [read post]
18 Jun 2020, 4:00 am
Forest Service v. [read post]
4 Apr 2018, 7:38 am
Tyler V. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 8:25 pm
Ctr., Inc. v. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 8:44 am
Farris, 542 F.3d 499, 500-01 (6th Cir. 2008). [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 3:59 am
United States, in which the court upheld the convictions of the defendants in a notorious murder trial over a claim that evidence had been suppressed in violation of Brady v. [read post]
26 Oct 2017, 8:01 pm
State v. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 12:53 am
The Court stated that a common sense inference of “but for” causation from proof of negligence usually flows without difficulty. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 4:17 am
Commentary on Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 1:22 pm
” United States v. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 8:10 am
” Farris v. [read post]
14 Sep 2008, 8:10 pm
Farris et alAT&T v. [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 11:45 pm
State v. [read post]
30 Jun 2011, 12:14 pm
The case is styled, Cynthia Farris, as next friend of Vidal de Jesus Farias, a minor v. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 9:02 am
" Apache Corp. v. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 8:51 am
Kelly v. [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 10:01 am
However, it is a modified comparative negligence state so they must show that they are 50 percent or less at fault. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 8:16 am
Additionally, where an accused knows about certain evidence and denies any knowledge, an intent to mislead is established (see: Farris v The Queen, 1965 CanII 201 (ONCA)) Furthermore, as per R v Prashad, 2004 CanLII 34382 (ONCA) the Crown does not need to prove that the accused lied about a matter which is actually fact, only that he gave evidence that he knew to be dishonest with an intent to mislead the court. [read post]
4 Sep 2022, 4:15 pm
On 1 August 2022, judgment was handed down in Wright v McCormack [2022] EWHC 2068 (QB) by Chamberlain J. [read post]
