Search for: "People v. Case"
Results 1581 - 1600
of 52,290
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Oct 2019, 6:08 am
The pair talk about Pam Karlan’s opening argument in Bostock v. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 6:24 pm
Supreme Court took up Toca v. [read post]
9 Dec 2006, 4:41 pm
(2) Detriment to reputation - tarnishment-type cases, MAC Dog/MAC Cat for pet food; Claeryn v. [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 2:27 pm
Maybe transfer the case (or probation) to Florida? [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 11:36 am
Don't cross the line for no reason.In this case, as in many others, the defendant has been caught dead to rights. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 3:08 pm
If, after conducting the hearing, the juvenile court judge determines that Vela’s case should be transferred to a court of criminal jurisdiction, then his convictions and sentence will be reinstated. [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 1:18 pm
So my guess is that the vehicle is actually worth less than the $500 that the defense postulates, since a car with 200,000 miles on it is worth a fair piece less than one with 100,000 miles on it.)The other funny thing about this case is the discrepancy between the resources devoted to the case in the trial court and the resources devoted to it on appeal. [read post]
24 Sep 2018, 2:43 pm
But I think it's a tough question how far the police are able to go when all they have on you is that you're carrying a personal amount of weed, which may well be -- and in the vast majority of case, is (I suspect) -- legal under California law. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 2:00 am
In Rucho v Common Cause, 588 U.S. ____ (2019), the U.S. [read post]
29 Aug 2024, 7:07 am
It is crucial that practitioners working with asylum seekers watch for updates in this case. [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 7:56 am
Several justices in previous cases, such as Mitchell v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 7:57 am
In a Massachusetts collection case, RIAA v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 10:02 am
[Here's a link to the court of appeals case information if you are interested.] [read post]
21 May 2008, 12:38 am
R v Bassett; [2008] WLR (D) 157 “For an offence of voyeurism to be committed, within the definition in s 67 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, there had to be a private act which involved parts of the body for which people would normally expect privacy, as defined by s 68(1). [read post]
23 Nov 2010, 9:16 pm
Today’s blog looks at the case of Videchak v. [read post]
11 May 2010, 1:07 pm
Particularly in a case about a bar fight.Were I the trial court, I'd have done the following. [read post]
13 May 2013, 7:18 am
State v. [read post]
24 Jan 2022, 10:13 am
What do people want to eliminate--the actual malice requirement or the larger edifice created in later cases? [read post]
20 Feb 2023, 9:00 am
One such example is the case of Abrams v. [read post]
22 May 2016, 12:41 pm
But in a recent case out of Pennsylvania, Gallatin v. [read post]
