Search for: "State v. Vega"
Results 1241 - 1260
of 1,376
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Nov 2008, 11:30 am
Lowe of Manhattan held in Nama Holdings LLC v. [read post]
31 Oct 2008, 12:33 pm
United States v. [read post]
29 Oct 2008, 6:42 pm
In a most recent case, however, Bayne v. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 8:00 am
Section V. of the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure is titled "Depositions and Discovery" and, as stated, contains the rules for the tools used in the Discovery process. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 9:35 am
You can read the underlying opinion here(though there may be problems with the hyperlink).Aaron Vega v. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 8:47 am
An appropriate follow-up to last week’s post that discussed the pitfalls of the standard of review is United States v. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 5:31 am
(State) (52399) [read post]
30 Sep 2008, 10:11 pm
Jones Day v. [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 7:50 pm
Alexander, No. 071780 In a conviction for sale of controlled substance in or near school grounds, denial of writ of habeas corpus is affirmed over claims that the state courts unreasonably applied Batson v. [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 10:21 am
Jones Day v. [read post]
27 Sep 2008, 7:30 pm
United States v. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 1:40 pm
[09/24] US v. [read post]
17 Sep 2008, 10:30 am
Jones Day v. [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 11:53 pm
Sure enough, the docket in that case, Jones Day v. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 7:36 pm
Relying extensively on Press Enterprise v. [read post]
5 Sep 2008, 11:01 pm
& Ors v Deisel Spa and Case C-302/08 Zino Davidoff SA v Bendesfinanzdirektion Sudost: (Class 46), EPO Boards of Appeal finds that when a fax is transmitted and an ‘OK’ is noted by the sender, this is evidence that the transmission was successful: (IPKat), Professor Hugenholtz slams European Commission for ignoring evidence on copyright extension: (Techdirt) Germany Federal Patent Court publishes guidelines on colour trade mark Signal Yellow:… [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:15 pm
Mitchell, No. 02-3505 Denial of a petition for habeas relief in a death penalty case is reversed where: 1) a state court applied the Strickland standard in an objectively unreasonable manner for purposes of claims that petitioner's counsel were ineffective in preparing for the sentencing phase of his trial; 2) the state court unreasonably determined that the alleged errors of trial counsel did not prejudice petitioner's case; and 3) a state court erroneously… [read post]
22 Aug 2008, 2:12 am
” That, of course, is the same day the Supreme Court returns to work after its summer recess, some four months after its ruling in Boumediene v. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 3:52 pm
A split decision today from the Eleventh Circuit in US v. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 2:36 pm
United States v. [read post]
