Search for: "See v. See"
Results 1301 - 1320
of 122,076
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Apr 2020, 1:20 pm
See Collabo Innovations, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 2:37 pm
Here's one you don't see everyday: a stipulated reversal of a punitive damages award. [read post]
9 May 2012, 7:07 am
In Potts v. [read post]
30 May 2014, 1:37 am
See, e.g. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 3:03 am
in Frederick v Meighan ;2010 NY Slip Op 06076 ;Appellate Division, Second Department we see the effect of Attorney 2 failing to clean up Attorney 1's mistakes. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 10:35 am
The Court of Appeal holds in this case that it's only a "de minimus" search -- and hence okay under the Fourth Amendment -- for a police officer (without a warrant) to insert a key into a residence to see whether it unlocks the door.You can see where the Court of Appeal's coming from. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 10:45 am
But I don't entirely see how this one is different than your usual run-of-the-mill case of murder during a robbery.Of course, one might take the position that everyone who commits such a crime should be sentenced to death. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 1:51 pm
See e.g., United States v. [read post]
Chief Justice John Roberts and the “Privilege” of Seeing the World from Behind Fences and Barricades
25 May 2023, 9:01 pm
Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire. [read post]
8 May 2009, 9:28 am
DeStefano matter (for background, see my prior posts here). [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 2:00 am
For an application of this test, see the recent case of Moore v. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 12:30 pm
Inasmuch as respondent failed to engage in the necessary balancing test, we vacate the determination, and we remit the matter to respondent for a de novo determination (see Matter of Nye v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Grand Is., 81 AD3d 1455, 1456; Matter of Fusco v Russell, 283 AD2d 936, 936). [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 11:15 am
It should not surprise anyone that in People v Durand (2009 NY Slip Op 04476 4th Dept 6/5/09) the Court held that under New York law it was error for the lower court to have considered "the counts of burglary in the third degree and petit larceny, of which defendant was acquitted, when imposing the sentences on the criminal trespass counts (see People v Reeder, 298 AD2d 468, lv denied 99 NY2d 538; see also People v Rogers, 56 AD3d 1173, 1174). [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 7:37 am
See Khan v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 11:52 am
See Davis v. [read post]
16 Aug 2018, 1:10 pm
Circuit’s much-awaited decision in ACA International v. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 9:12 am
Among the relisted cases we have been following (see here and here), Wong v. [read post]
11 Jan 2008, 10:02 am
PatentBaristas has a post on evidentiary issues in the Tafas v. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 5:45 am
In the ongoing debate over Dobbs v. [read post]
16 Jul 2008, 12:15 pm
We did an earlier post on Wood v. [read post]
