Search for: "ROBINSON v. STATE" Results 1521 - 1540 of 2,093
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Dec 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, heard 12 Jul 2017. [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 1:44 pm by Howard Knopf
”The Supreme Court of Canada could at any time now deliver its judgment in the case involving Cinar and Claude Robinson, et al which will presumably focus on the question of what is a “substantial part”.In the somewhat longer term, we know that we will see:The hearing in the Federal Court of Appeal on the Warman v. [read post]
11 Sep 2023, 6:07 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Court also provides interesting analysis on what constitutes an adverse action under Title VII.The case is Banks v. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 9:18 pm
Prelesnik, No. 072522 In conviction for second degree murder, grant of writ of habeas corpus for ineffective counsel is affirmed where: 1) potential alibi witnesses coupled with an otherwise weak case rendered the failure to investigate the testimony sufficient to "undermine confidence" in the outcome of the jury verdict; and 2) the state appellate court's application of Strickland v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 6:47 am by Erin Miller
(all) Amicus brief of the Cato Institute et al. (09-988) Amicus brief of eight states (09-991) Title: PLIVA, Inc. v. [read post]
16 May 2019, 4:12 am by Edith Roberts
Hyatt, in which the court overruled a 40-year-old precedent and held that a state cannot be sued in the courts of another state without its consent. [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 7:20 am by Robin E. Kobayashi
Robinson, Co-Editor-in-Chief, Workers’ Compensation Emerging Issues Analysis (LexisNexis) As we move through the third decade of the twenty-first century, the United States remains a land of contradictions. [read post]
16 Dec 2018, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
The University of Strathclyde has commented on this issues stating that “Digital surveillance holds one in five of writers back”. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 7:37 am
 Indeed, the practice of obtaining and executing Anton Piller orders was subject to a critical review by Mr Justice Scott in Columbia Picture Industries v Robinson [1986] (and see also the article "Piller problems"(1990) 106 LQR 601 by Professor Dockray and, as he then was, Hugh Laddie QC). [read post]