Search for: "Humphries v. State"
Results 101 - 120
of 142
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2010, 7:28 am
That issue was raised by the state of California in Harrington v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 7:07 am
Humphries (09-350) and Harrington v. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 2:20 pm
United States Docket: 09-342 Issues: (1) What constitutes the proper denominator in the takings fraction under Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 11:41 am
Humphries, 09–350 (relisted on 1/8/10, 1/15, and, apparently, 1/22), and Harrington v. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 1:18 pm
Humphries, 300 Ga. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 10:56 am
UPDATE, Jan. 7: Today United States v. [read post]
11 May 2009, 10:21 pm
Madam Justice Humphries put it this way in Lumanlan v. [read post]
27 Feb 2009, 4:29 am
In a recent United States Supreme Court case, CBOCS West, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2009, 9:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
13 Nov 2008, 3:53 pm
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, November 05, 2008 Humphries v. [read post]
13 Nov 2008, 3:45 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, November 05, 2008 US v. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 11:43 am
Humphries v. [read post]
23 Sep 2008, 7:30 pm
Rule 57(10) of the BC Supreme Court rules states that A plaintiff who recovers a sum within the jurisdiction of the Provincial Court under the Small Claims Act is not entitled to costs, other than disbursements, unless the court finds that there was sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the Supreme Court and so orders. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 6:32 pm
Humphries, in which the Court held that 42 U.S.C. [read post]
23 Jun 2008, 9:09 pm
In the first case, CBOCS West, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 5:40 pm
Supreme Court held in CBOCS West, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2008, 8:34 am
Humphries and Gomez-Perez v. [read post]
2 Jun 2008, 1:50 pm
The Court answered in the affirmative in both cases.In Gomez-Perez v. [read post]
2 Jun 2008, 11:36 am
Humphries, No. 06-1431 The longstanding civil rights law, 42 U.S.C. section 1981, encompasses retaliation claims. [read post]
30 May 2008, 2:28 am
"
State v. [read post]