Search for: "State v. Phillips"
Results 1021 - 1040
of 2,874
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Feb 2016, 8:10 am
Phillips Hardware Co., 88 So. 2d 507, 507-08 (Fla. 1956). [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 8:10 am
Phillips Hardware Co., 88 So. 2d 507, 507-08 (Fla. 1956). [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 4:31 am
In a 2013 decision, Kadi v. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 11:05 am
Pulse Electronics and Stryker Corp. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 4:28 am
He successfully argued on behalf of the Sac and Fox Nation in the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Oklahoma Tax Commission v. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 7:34 am
RUEDA, Appellant V. [read post]
10 Feb 2016, 12:07 pm
’” KCJ Corp. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 6:30 am
Phillips, Patrick J.J. [read post]
7 Feb 2016, 6:23 pm
Dean Ardron of Ursel Phillips Fellows Hopkinson LLP covered the employer right to surveillance. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 1:48 pm
Columbia University v. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 1:44 pm
” (Cairns v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 4:19 pm
Phillips of the District of Columbia, Assistant Director in Charge Paul M. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 12:46 pm
” Phillips v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 8:00 am
Termination of the employee following unsuccessful progressive disciplinary efforts did not shock the court’s "sense of fairness”Phillips v York, 2016 NY Slip Op 00418, Appellate Division, Third DepartmentWarren County Sheriff's Office patrol officer Scott C. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 8:33 am
On Friday, January 15, 2016, the United States Supreme Court accepted the petitioner’s request to hear Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 9:59 am
Brennan v. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 6:53 am
The Montana Supreme Court has issued an Opinion in the following matter: CRIMINAL – OTHER DA 14-0596, 2016 MT 21, STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 4:35 am
As Laing J observed in Merlin v Cave [2014] EWHC 3036 (QB): “There is no express indication in the PHA that Parliament intended the provisions of the PHA to abrogate the rights conferred by Article 10, or to change the law of defamation, which is, by necessary implication, involved in any consideration of the scope of the legitimate restrictions which may be placed by a contracting state on the rights conferred by Article 10. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 10:41 am
Fountain v. [read post]
