Search for: "SMITH v. GOULD"
Results 101 - 120
of 134
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Feb 2010, 10:24 am
The six votes on the topside generally consisted of the conservatives: Chief Judge Kozinski and Judges Rymer, Clifton, Ikuta, and Randy Smith, plus Judge Gould. [read post]
29 Dec 2009, 2:20 am
The case is Sapp & Smith v. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 3:51 pm
The 9th denies (Bea joined by Gould and Molloy). [read post]
14 Nov 2009, 4:44 pm
United States v. [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 1:02 pm
Add to these two Judges McKeown, Gould, Milan Smith, and Ikuta and you're looking at 7 total recusals -- a really high number, and something you don't usually see.So we'll see how this one comes out in the en banc process. [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 8:39 am
U.S. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 10:01 pm
California: Family Law Guy by Richard Gould-Saltman, Esq. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 6:18 am
Stern School of Business New York University Ehud Kamar Professor of Law Gould School of Law University of Southern California Naveen Khanna AJ Pasant Endowed Chair Professor of Finance Broad College of Business Michigan State University Vikramaditya S. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 3:08 am
Holley v. [read post]
5 Apr 2009, 1:51 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Mar 2009, 9:42 am
Four strong conservatives -- Judges O'Scannlain, Rymer, Bybee, and Randy Smith -- plus Judge Tallman (a reliably conservative Clinton appointee) and Judge Gould (Clinton). [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 8:10 am
Last week, on behalf of sixty corporate and securities law professors from thirty-eight law schools around the country, I filed an amici curiae brief in the case of Lucian Bebchuk vs. [read post]
24 Jan 2009, 7:47 am
United States v. [read post]
31 Dec 2008, 12:21 pm
Smith) joined the dissent. [read post]
2 Nov 2008, 7:46 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Oct 2008, 12:54 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
3 Sep 2008, 4:21 pm
Smith argues that precedent is precedent, and that the jury instruction should have been given.U.S. v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 1:12 pm
See Smith v. [read post]
1 Aug 2008, 10:43 am
Gould argues that Gall is not an abdication of reasonableness review.Mendez v. [read post]
14 Jul 2008, 8:22 pm
The two dissenters who contended that the strip search was a constitutional violation, but that this violation wasn't clear and hence the defendants had qualified immunity, consisted of two Clinton appointees (Judges Gould and Silverman). [read post]
