Search for: "Hickman v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 230
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Sep 2010, 5:30 pm by INFORRM
It is exceptionally rare for interim injunctions intended to stop publication of allegedly defamatory material to be granted in defamation cases because of the rule in the 1891 case of Bonnard v Perryman, which states that an order should not be granted if a defendant says he or she will justify an allegation. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 12:33 pm by Steven M. Gursten
See, e.g., Wesche v Mecosta Co Rd Comm , 480 Mich 75, 91 n 13 (2008); Al-Shimmari v Detroit Med Ctr, 477 Mich 280, 297 n 10; 731 NW2d 29 (2007); Neal v Wilkes, 470 Mich 661, 667 n 8; 685 NW2d 648 (2004); People v Hickman, 470 Mich 602, 610 n 6; 684 NW2d 267 (2004); Mack v Detroit, 467 Mich 186, 203 n 19; 649 NW2d 47 (2002). [read post]
2 Apr 2010, 9:46 am by Diane Polscer
Summary judgment was recently granted to State Farm in the case of Ass'n of Unit Owners of Nestani v. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 11:10 am by Sheppard Mullin
Attorney Work Product Protection of Witness Statements Under Federal Law The attorney work product doctrine, and its application to witness statements, was first recognized in Hickman v. [read post]
4 Sep 2009, 4:00 am
The Doctrine traces its roots to a 1947 Supreme Court decision, Hickman v. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 6:22 am
In a case concerning an IRS audit -- but having potentially far-reaching implications for all manner of litigation and discovery -- United States v. [read post]