Search for: "S. Cupp"
Results 121 - 140
of 150
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 May 2014, 9:12 am
What is the employer’s burden here, asked Justice French? [read post]
14 Aug 2020, 3:00 am
The court sounded sharply skeptical about arguments by Flynn’s attorney and the Justice Department that U.S. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 9:57 am
Because Justice O'Donnell's opinion was joined only by three others of the seven (O'Connor, Lanzinger, and Cupp). [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 3:42 am
Finally, here’s something else to chew on. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 3:38 am
While this is certainly specific enough to provide guidance to the lower courts, it’s broad enough to provide some basis for the assertion in Lanzinger’s dissent (joined by Cupp) that it comes “dangerously close to encouraging trial courts to dismiss disabled jurors outright rather than risk reversal on appeal. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:35 am
So what’s going to happen? [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 4:21 am
Six of the justices who decided Ferguson are still on the court: O’Connor wrote the majority opinion, joined by Cupp and O’Donnell, while Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, and Lanzinger dissented. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 6:14 am
Cupp offered a way out: not require anything more if the appeal is from a trial conviction, but keep Wilson intact where the appeal is from a plea. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 3:46 am
The majority (O’Connor, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, and Cupp) hold that Galatis is limited to cases involving substantive law, rather than procedural or evidentiary rules, relying largely on the US Supreme Court’s recent analysis of stare decisis in Pearson v. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 3:43 am
Isn’t the rule one of form, not substance, inquired Cupp? [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 2:16 pm
Cupp, Jr., Considering the Private Animal and Damages, 98 Wash. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 5:06 am
The purpose of the rule, Cupp’s opinion for the majority holds, is to make the conviction final for purposes of appeal, so substantively all that is required is the fact of conviction. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 3:40 am
Cupp and O’Donnell are generally regarded as reliable votes for the State’s position in criminal cases, and they could have viewed Bezak at the time they ruled on it as a way of avoiding the situation where defendants get a pass on PRC because the judge didn’t do it right; giving the defendant a second chance at an appeal might be sufficient to get them to re-evaluation their position. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 5:06 am
How could the court make a jurisdictional ruling and limit it to only prospective application, wondered Justice Cupp? [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 4:27 am
Cupp. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 3:40 am
So what’s it all mean? [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 7:55 am
Cupp. [read post]
13 May 2021, 12:19 pm
Cupp case, the U.S. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 5:57 am
The district court judge’s opinion in this case begins by explaining that MLDC Government Services Corp. [read post]
30 Dec 2007, 8:03 am
Justice Cupp concurred separately, providing a fifth vote in favor of upholding all of the tort reform provisions. [read post]
