Search for: "State v. Harris" Results 1781 - 1800 of 5,749
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Oct 2015, 3:12 am by Amy Howe
In the Arizona Daily Star, Howard Fischer previews the December argument in Harris v. [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 12:21 pm
Franklin in the first paragraph of Franklin v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 12:33 pm
But a new Seventh Circuit decision from just last week, United States v. [read post]
5 Nov 2015, 4:43 am by Amy Howe
Harris, a challenge to a California policy requiring non-profits to disclose the names of their major donors. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 2:52 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In granting the motion, the court determined, inter alia, that defendants established as a matter of law that plaintiff is unable to prove that defendants' [*2]negligence is a proximate cause of plaintiff's damages (see Robbins v Harris Beach & Wilcox, 291 AD2d 797, 798). [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 4:27 am
In granting the motion, the court determined, inter alia, that defendants established as a matter of law that plaintiff is unable to prove that defendants' [*2]negligence is a proximate cause of plaintiff's damages (see Robbins v Harris Beach & Wilcox, 291 AD2d 797, 798). [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 1:46 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In granting the motion, the court determined, inter alia, that defendants established as a matter of law that plaintiff is unable to prove that defendants' [*2]negligence is a proximate cause of plaintiff's damages (see Robbins v Harris Beach & Wilcox, 291 AD2d 797, 798). [read post]
19 May 2010, 7:11 am by Anna Christensen
Florida and United States v. [read post]
12 Sep 2019, 4:02 am by Edith Roberts
Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 1:50 am
City of Douglas, Coffinberry v. [read post]
10 Oct 2020, 1:55 pm by Matt Cooper
The opinion reversed a lower court decision and prevented Harris County from mailing applications to all 2.4 million voters in the county. [read post]
29 May 2009, 4:00 am
Harris Associates(.pdf) Petitioner's reply in Jones, et al., v. [read post]