Search for: "Morales v. Superior Court" Results 161 - 180 of 522
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Mar 2009, 11:05 am
Supreme Court's unanimous opinion in the "ceded lands" case, Hawaii v. [read post]
18 Mar 2016, 2:04 pm
Superior Court, 54 Cal. 3d 868, 885 (1991) (citation and quotation marks omitted). [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 10:00 am by Katherine Gallo
Superior Court (1997) 16 C4th 1101, 1107 citing Greyhound Corp v Superior Court (1961) 56 C2d 355, 376] and Fairmont Ins. [read post]
12 May 2020, 3:14 pm by Patricia Hughes
An Australian law firm’s “Tips and tricks for online hearings” refers to a ruling by the Federal Court of Australia that a case with 50 witnesses that was scheduled for six weeks would proceed virtually, despite the objection of one of the parties (Capic v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited (Adjournment)). [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 6:55 am by Thaddeus Hoffmeister
Resolving Juror Confusion New York’s Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department rendered an opinion in People v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 2:29 pm by Mack Sperling
  They resigned as trustees by filing a written "Notice of Resignation" with the Union County Superior Court on December 3, 2007. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 9:58 am by Eugene Volokh
From Wednesday's California Court of Appeal decision in Firefighters4Freedom v. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 7:45 am
This post examines a recent opinion from the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas: State v. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 7:31 pm
United States (1878) to Employment Division v. [read post]
27 Oct 2018, 7:52 am by INFORRM
  This is a question that, as the Supreme Court confirmed in 2010 (in R v Chaytor), and as the High Court reminded us as recently as 15 June 2018, is an appropriate question for the court to determine. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 7:18 am
The court sentenced him to probation on the condition that he spend one year in local custody, but it stayed execution of the sentence pending this appeal.People v. [read post]
8 Aug 2015, 4:12 pm by INFORRM
So the meaning was not that Mr Cripps condoned Hitler’s atrocities based on his Aryan race superiority and the trial judge made an error in finding that. [read post]