Search for: "Cates v. State" Results 21 - 40 of 111
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Feb 2018, 2:10 pm by Jordan Brunner
William Ford posted the Fourth Circuit’s ruling in IRAP v. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 8:55 am by jlucivero
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 by Liam Otten
Wrighton (right) with attorneys Paul Clement and Cate Stetson following mock oral arguments before “The Supreme Court of the State of Twain. [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]
15 Dec 2014, 8:30 am by Wells Bennett
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]
22 Jun 2014, 10:57 am by Howard Friedman
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 by Federalist Society
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 by Federalist Society
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 by S2KM Limited
Badgley, P.C. cite six Illinois Appellate Court decisions (including Settlement Funding v. [read post]