Search for: "Davis v. Waters"
Results 1 - 20
of 409
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 May 2014, 6:09 am
” This right was first recognized in 1906 by the United States Supreme Court in Winters v. [read post]
27 May 2021, 5:11 pm
Davis drove into someone’s backyard, got out of his vehicle carrying a backpack, ran on foot into a swamp, and got stuck in knee-high water. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 6:38 am
Davis, Valarie M. [read post]
9 Jan 2018, 7:41 am
Railway Co. v. [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 2:46 pm
Water that is diverted for purposes of irrigation, however, 'is not deemed severed and thus remains [realty]' (13 Witkin, supra, § 91, p. 113); 'In the case of water for irrigation, delivered in ditches or pipes, the severance does not take place at all'.In a usually overlooked part of People v. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 12:16 pm
Davis v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 12:21 pm
Davis, 139 S. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 5:25 am
To view a copy of the Appellate Division, Second Department's decision, please use this link: Davis v. [read post]
18 May 2011, 10:32 am
In Davis v. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 2:28 pm
Davis v. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 2:34 pm
Davis, No. 18-431. [read post]
18 Mar 2014, 2:34 pm
For example, in Syvrud v. [read post]
19 Jun 2019, 4:25 am
A recent case from the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, which is styled, Davis v. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 5:49 am
§ 415 and regulations promulgated thereunder; the federal Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1251, et seq. and regulations promulgated thereunder; and the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 6:14 am
(Davis v. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 8:18 am
D90 Energy, LLC v. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 12:00 pm
Davis v. [read post]
2 Oct 2009, 1:47 am
Co. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 4:00 am
’ See Davis v. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 2:59 pm
The high water mark of the madness was probably the RIAA/MPAA's success in getting Judge Davis to disregard the jury instruction he had planned to give, and to use their instruction, which disregarded -- indeed contradicted -- the plain words of the US Copyright Act, in Capitol v. [read post]
