Search for: "Brady v. Brady" Results 1901 - 1920 of 2,030
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Oct 2015, 3:38 pm by John Floyd
The new provisions give voice to the admonition in Imble v. [read post]
9 May 2014, 8:54 am by John Elwood
Aguilar, 13-677, a case in which California sought to reverse the Ninth Circuit’s determination that Brady v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 9:07 am by John Elwood
New Relists Patterson v. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 5:13 am by INFORRM
See Reynolds v Times Newspapers Limited [2001] 2 AC 127 HL, which created the defence, and Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2007] 1 AC 359 HL, which revitalised it. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 12:38 pm by John Elwood
Pope, denying calls for his recusal, then presided over the coram nobis proceedings in which Isom argued he was entitled to relief because of Brady v. [read post]
27 Oct 2008, 3:49 pm
encing facts were properly submitted to the jury; 11) the indictment was sufficient, as was the evidence supporting various counts; 12) a Brady claim was meritless; and 13) there was no plain error as to jury instructions regarding "Conspiracy" and "aiding and abetting". [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 5:29 am by Aaron Tang
For ineffective assistance and Brady claims, the most common, it merges with an element of the claim. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar and Michael Schaps
” In challenging this federal directive, San Francisco relies on principles of federalism as expounded in Printz v. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 1:23 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: DRM for streaming music dies a quiet death: (Electronic Frontier Foundation), (Techdirt) CAFC decides Apotex and Impax infringed AstraZeneca’s Prilosec patents: (Law360), (Patent Prospector), (Patent Docs), (GenericsWeb), CAFC upholds lower court’s decision finding USPTO was within its rights to subject a Cooper patent to… [read post]
18 Nov 2024, 1:29 am by INFORRM
Developments PTY Limited v Mccreight [2024] SADC 149. [read post]