Search for: "US v. Levelle Grant" Results 1061 - 1080 of 9,109
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Apr 2014, 11:56 am
 The habeas grant resulted from the report and recommendation of a federal magistrate judge. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 11:53 am by emagraken
Traditionally, absolute privilege was granted to any “communications which take place during, incidental to, and the processing and furtherance of, judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings”: Elliott v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 4:18 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist, Steven Mazie discusses Wednesday’s argument in Endrew F. v. [read post]
2 Jul 2007, 3:43 am
This posting covers the four patent cases that were appealed from the district court level and decided by the Federal Circuit during the 26th calendar week of 2007. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 5:15 am by Guest Blogger
The challenges, however, hit their own high water mark when the Supreme Court granted review in King v. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:19 pm
  The standard for showing ineffective assistance of counsel rising to a level that violates a defendant's constitutional rights to such a degree that would require a defendant to obtain a new trial is set forth in the 1984 United States Supreme Court decision of Strickland v. [read post]
22 May 2013, 5:19 pm
  The standard for showing ineffective assistance of counsel rising to a level that violates a defendant’s constitutional rights to such a degree that would require a defendant to obtain a new trial is set forth in the 1984 United States Supreme Court decision of Strickland v. [read post]
28 Dec 2010, 3:35 am
This was the issue raised in the Harrigan, a case decided by the US Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit on August 23, 2000.In March 1996 Robert Jordan and some 500 other candidates for appointment as police officers with various municipal police departments in Connecticut were screened using the Wonderlic Personnel Test and Scholastic Level Exam [WPT]. [read post]
13 Sep 2021, 11:36 am by Eric Goldman
This matters because 1591 requires a higher level of defendant scienter than 1595–so high that plaintiffs will have a difficult time showing it. [read post]