Search for: "State v. Sua"
Results 101 - 120
of 1,289
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Nov 2012, 3:03 am
Maclean-Fogg Co. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 12:40 pm
United States, 09-11328, and Smith v. [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 12:20 pm
State v. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 8:53 am
Stanley v. [read post]
25 Dec 2010, 9:15 pm
State v. [read post]
1 May 2014, 10:03 am
In Ortiz v. [read post]
11 Jan 2007, 9:44 pm
" Here is the abstract:This paper 1) notices that Booker uprooted the statutory basis for the departure concept, suggesting that courts are at liberty to deviate from precedent rooted in the pre-Booker concept; 2) explains why Rule 32(i)(1)(C) as read by Burns v United States requires notice prior to sua sponte non-Guidelines sentences in those jurisdictions that require a distinct legal determination if a non-Guidelines sentence is warranted; and 3) discusses… [read post]
Harrison v. Leach, Ky. S. Ct., Waiver of Standing, Right of Non-Parent to Seek Custody Not Addressed
19 Nov 2010, 6:12 am
Harrison v. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 12:36 am
The plaintiffs demonstrated that they did not have notice of the trial calendar call of the action through the uncontroverted affidavit of their attorney, which stated that counsel did not receive any notice for a court appearance. [read post]
9 Jun 2008, 8:48 am
Davis v. [read post]
31 Dec 2020, 10:20 am
” United States v. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 11:13 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
STATE V. [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 5:36 am
See State v. [read post]
4 Mar 2013, 9:17 am
Specifically, Safeco argues that (1) the court improperly advised Richard Gay, sua sponte, as to his privilege under the fifth amendment to the United States constitution against self-incrimination and (2) the court abused its discretion by denying Safeco's motion to compel inspection of the Gays' home. [read post]
8 May 2019, 4:10 am
New York's highest state court has dismissed sua sponte the appeal in In the Matter of Cunningham v. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 3:34 am
While the DeCaro defendants contend that a rescission defense based on unilateral mistake would not have been successful in the underlying action for specific performance, specific performance may be denied based on unilateral mistake [*4]where the other party must have been aware of the mistake (see Da Silva v Musso, 53 NY2d 543, 548; Sheridan Drive-In v State of New York, 16 AD2d 400, 405; Harper, Inc. v City of Newburgh, 159 App Div 695, 696-697). [read post]
6 Oct 2013, 2:22 pm
In Skolnick v. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 5:43 am
The appeals court agreed with Father, stating that the trial court erred in their sua sponte order for civil contempt. [read post]
