Search for: "Pooler v State"
Results 101 - 120
of 307
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Aug 2008, 4:51 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Sep 2008, 4:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
16 Oct 2007, 10:57 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 1:13 pm
United States v. [read post]
26 Dec 2007, 8:24 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 2:56 pm
United States v. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 5:15 am
The decision denying rehearing en banc in United States v. [read post]
21 Nov 2007, 11:34 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 9:21 am
The Court of Appeals says the plaintiff can sue these fellas under Section 1983.The case is Gleason v. [read post]
16 Sep 2020, 6:31 am
A traffic stop that revealed the defendant had a gun and drugs results in a split Second Circuit ruling that declares the search illegal while the concurring judge bemoans the state of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, stating there is not enough case law to protect the victims of police misconduct.The case is United States v. [read post]
18 May 2013, 5:29 am
[Judge Pooler dissents in part with a separate opinion.] [read post]
18 May 2021, 7:00 am
The Court of Appeals (Jacobs, Park and Pooler) remands the case to the district court to decide if these allegations state a plausible claim under the Iqbal pleading standard. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 6:09 am
Like in this case.The case is Taylor v. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 4:32 pm
Pooler, Gerard E. [read post]
2 Oct 2013, 3:18 am
Judge Newman further challenges Jaffer, reiterating his contention that a Vaughn index is too vague to be useful and stating that this case is primarily about the OLC-DOD memo. [read post]
8 Sep 2016, 8:51 am
The State Executive Law spells this out. [read post]
24 Dec 2006, 9:26 am
I've gone back and reviewed the beginning of the tape and, sure enough, Judge Pooler states that Judge Sach (sp?) [read post]
15 Nov 2019, 6:32 am
That's the rule in Mireles v. [read post]
24 Nov 2021, 6:24 am
" In a prior case, Costabile v. [read post]
6 Apr 2021, 5:57 am
This case shows us how it all works.The case is Watley v. [read post]
