Search for: "Cates v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 104
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Feb 2018, 4:36 am
William Ford posted the Fourth Circuit’s ruling against President Trump’s travel ban in IRAP v. [read post]
16 Feb 2018, 2:10 pm
William Ford posted the Fourth Circuit’s ruling in IRAP v. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 8:55 am
With this sweeping new rule, New York has become the first state in the nation to require all of its criminal trial judges to issue so-called “Brady orders” in every case (named after the 1963 case of Brady v. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 7:00 pm
Wrighton (right) with attorneys Paul Clement and Cate Stetson following mock oral arguments before “The Supreme Court of the State of Twain. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 6:00 am
Baker v. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 6:00 am
Baker v. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 6:00 am
Baker v. [read post]
24 Oct 2016, 10:47 am
Co. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 10:11 am
Cuero v. [read post]
30 Jun 2016, 12:25 pm
Relatively harsh words from the Ninth Circuit this morning.The majority -- Judge Wardlaw, joined by Judge Silverman -- believe that there was a plea deal (and that the state breached it). [read post]
20 Mar 2016, 9:49 am
Cate, 2016 U.S. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 7:49 am
Co. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 4:15 am
Cate, 2015 U.S. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 8:08 am
See, e.g., Troxel v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 8:30 am
During his time as a teacher he has also argued a number of major cases in state and federal courts, most notably Daubert v. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 1:45 pm
State v. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 10:57 am
Cate, (9th Cir., June 16, 2014), the 9th Circuit reversed the dismissal of a Shetaut Neter inmate's RLUIPA claim for a Kemetic diet, holding that the government had not adequately shown there was not a less restrictive alternative to denying plaintiff's food request.In Ali v. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 9:08 am
The issue is whether SLUSA preempts a class action in which the plaintiff-victims allege “(1) that they “purchase[d]” uncovered securities (certificates of deposit that [we]re not traded on any national exchange), but (2) that the defendants falsely told the victims that the uncovered securities were backed by covered securities. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 9:08 am
The issue is whether SLUSA preempts a class action in which the plaintiff-victims allege “(1) that they “purchase[d]” uncovered securities (certificates of deposit that [we]re not traded on any national exchange), but (2) that the defendants falsely told the victims that the uncovered securities were backed by covered securities. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 10:47 am
Badgley, P.C. cite six Illinois Appellate Court decisions (including Settlement Funding v. [read post]
