Search for: "MARTIN v. STATE" Results 1401 - 1420 of 4,054
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Mar 2007, 12:26 pm
Probably the most interesting was the order depublishing Sony Electronics, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
., Forthcoming).From SSRN (Abortion and Reproductive Rights):Martin E. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 4:08 am
 As the Court of Appeals indicated in New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs. v Lanterman, 14 NY3d 275, termination from the position because the individual does not possess a valid required license or certification is not a disciplinary termination. [read post]
18 May 2022, 6:09 pm
Justice Alito instructs his readers (Dobbs draft slip op 35-36) "But when it comes to the interpretation of the Constitution—the 'great charter of our liberties,' which was meant 'to endure through a long lapse of ages,' [Martin v. [read post]
19 Jul 2021, 1:11 pm by John Lewis
Only days after issuing the Hamrick opinion, the Eleventh Circuit was again confronted with questions surrounding the FAA Section 1 exemption, in Martins v. [read post]
26 Oct 2021, 12:41 am by Florence Plisner (Bristows)
On 8 October 2021, His Honour Judge Hacon (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) handed down his decision in an action brought by Royalty Pharma Collection Trust (“Royalty Pharma”) for approximately €23 million in royalty payments from Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH (“Boehringer”) (Royalty Pharma Collection Trust v Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH [2021] EWHC 2692 (Pat)). [read post]
13 Dec 2019, 9:03 am by Andrew Hamm
Martin 19-605Issue: Whether, when a jury expressly states it is “unable to agree” on a defendant’s guilt for a greater offense and convicts the defendant of a lesser offense, and the defendant successfully appeals his conviction, the hung-jury rule permits retrial of the greater offense or Green v. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 12:41 pm by PaulKostro
(stating that “speculation does not meet the evidential requirements which would . . . defeat a summary judgment motion”), certif. granted, 183 N.J. 592 (2005), appeal dismissed Jan. 3, 2006; Martin v. [read post]