Search for: "State v. Lees"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 5,083
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2008, 6:08 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) Jimmy Lee Robinson v. [read post]
23 Feb 2018, 4:07 am
For USA Today, Richard Wolf reports that United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2008, 12:46 am
" One recalls that the recent Supreme court case involving Merck and Integra (drug companies) could just as well have been captioned Scripps v. [read post]
27 Oct 2007, 7:52 pm
It said the stay would remain in effect until the Supreme Court decided the issue in the Kentucky case of Baze v. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 6:32 pm
Lee (oral contract); Furuya v. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 5:25 am
The state trial court judge granted the motion, but Lee appealed that decision all the way through the Virginia state court system and then through two federal courts; he lost every time. [read post]
8 May 2018, 7:13 pm
Holmes of the United States Tax Court. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 2:29 pm
To be clear, this is not a case like Lee v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 7:09 am
State v. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 5:33 am
United States and Perez v. [read post]
18 Oct 2023, 6:36 am
To state a cause of action for legal malpractice, a party must allege that “(1) the attorneywas negligent; (2) the attorney’s negligence was a proximate cause of [the party’s] losses; and (3) [the party] suffered actual damages” (RTW Retailwinds, Inc. v Colucci & Umans, 231 AD3d 509, 510 [1st Dept 2023], citing Excelsior Capitol LLC v K & L Gates LLP, 138 AD3d 492 [1st Dept 2016]). [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 3:39 pm
Corfield v. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 4:46 am
In Jesinoski v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 4:23 pm
Justice Michael Lee stated in his judgment that they were uncontradicted by any evidence in reply from Lehrmann. [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 3:50 am
First up is Washington State Department of Licensing v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 8:08 am
Lee cannot state a cause of action for NIED based on the direct victim theory. [read post]
7 May 2010, 8:11 am
(See Leo v. [read post]
1 Jul 2009, 2:30 pm
United States, 128 S. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 1:44 pm
The decision was wrong because the decision-maker had misapplied the principles in Cadona v Mid-Bedfordshire Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 925. and Lee v Rhondda County Borough Council [2008] EWCA Civ 1013 . [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 1:44 pm
The decision was wrong because the decision-maker had misapplied the principles in Cadona v Mid-Bedfordshire Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 925. and Lee v Rhondda County Borough Council [2008] EWCA Civ 1013 . [read post]
