Search for: "Smith v Smith"
Results 1921 - 1940
of 14,648
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Aug 2009, 12:50 pm
If you don't like the case, the case never existed: Ordinarily, the decision to settle a case while an appeal is pending means giving up the opportunity to set a legal precedent as well as forgoing the chance to win a reversal of any unfavorable published decisions handed down by the lower court.But a team of defense lawyers fighting to overturn a $24 million verdict have figured out a way to have their settlement cake and eat their jurisprudence, too.The confidential settlement in… [read post]
26 Apr 2007, 8:23 am
Priscilla Smith(Priscilla Smith represented Dr. [read post]
1 May 2010, 2:30 pm
Earlier this week, I received an email from Jessica Ilyse Smith, journalist and producer of the Public Radio International show, Living on Earth. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 5:25 am
To view a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Smith v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 11:17 am
Today the United States Supreme Court, in Berghuis v. [read post]
2 Jun 2008, 2:21 am
Lacey Smith, No. 96,189 (Kan. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 9:06 am
The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, having been told by the Supreme Court to reconsider the Abu-Jamal case in light of Smith v. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 9:38 am
U.S. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2009, 3:00 pm
Chen v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 8:00 am
Smith v. [read post]
24 Nov 2008, 7:21 am
Co., 242 AD2d 889, 889-890; Smith v Pennsylvania Gen. [read post]
17 Jul 2024, 3:30 am
Gerald D. or Troxel v. [read post]
20 Jun 2020, 3:01 pm
See Cargill, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 3:25 am
Oct. 8, 2014), the Court of Appeals relied on the recent Tennessee Supreme Court decision of Smith v. [read post]
18 Mar 2007, 4:00 am
In Smith v. [read post]
18 Mar 2007, 4:00 am
In Smith v. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 2:15 pm
Which is not just a "Smith v. [read post]
22 Jun 2020, 2:24 pm
” “A spokeswoman for Foley wrote in an email that the firm declines comment on the allegations in Schumann/Steier Holdings v. [read post]
20 Oct 2015, 3:59 pm
Failure to do so is unconstitutional and requires reversal of the conviction (id.).Five days ago, the Appellate Division, First Department, held that the rule of law announced in Catu applies retroactively to pre-Catu convictions (People v Smith, __ NYS3d __, 2015 NY Slip Op 07565 [Oct. 15, 2015]). [read post]
