Search for: "Ex parte C.J."
Results 21 - 40
of 63
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Apr 2018, 4:36 am
This appears to be largely correct,** as C.J. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 4:54 pm
Further, the outside influences likely compounded the error created by the ex parte communication. [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 7:40 pm
” Ex parte Jimmy Lamar Killingsworth, Jr.; (In re: Jimmy Lamar Killingsworth, Jr. v. [read post]
1 May 2021, 5:12 am
" State ex rel. [read post]
11 Apr 2008, 11:24 am
BAKER, C.J., concurs. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 8:08 am
Two types of reexamination are available; an ex parte procedure and an inter partes procedure. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 12:59 pm
’” Id. at 468 (Roberts, C.J., lead op.); id. at 492 (Scalia, J., concurring in part and in the judgment) (similarly concluding that “test[s] that [are] tied to … a court’s perception[] of . . . intent” are “ineffective to vindicate the fundamental First Amendment rights” of those against whom the intent-based law is applied). [read post]
25 May 2008, 10:16 pm
They are, however, "a far cry from the threat of ex parte testimony that Crawford saw as underlying, and in part defining, the Confrontation Clause. [read post]
1 Apr 2024, 6:48 pm
It's part of a volume of opinions that he prepared for his son. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 10:33 am
" C.J. [read post]
2 Dec 2018, 2:49 pm
While the statutory status quo is an ex parte proceeding (see Criminal Code, s. [read post]
30 May 2007, 10:24 am
Otto appeals the trial court's ex parte order for protection. [read post]
30 May 2011, 8:12 pm
Ex parte State of Alabama; (In re: Thomas Robert Lane v. [read post]
26 Dec 2016, 9:07 am
State ex rel. [read post]
25 May 2010, 11:35 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 1:30 pm
Dental Ass’n, 139 F.3d 598 (1998) (en banc) (Tatel, J., dissenting) (along with Edwards, C.J., and Wald and Rogers, JJ., joining opinion arguing that intentional sex discrimination is sufficient to justify punitive damage award), rev’d, 527 U.S. 526 (1999). [read post]
15 May 2020, 4:30 am
" Purcell is, in part, correct. [read post]
17 May 2017, 4:37 am
Right to Life, 551 U.S. at 468 (Roberts, C.J., joined by Alito, J.) [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 7:20 am
Insofar as certain dicta in Ex Parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942) has sometimes been read to suggest otherwise, the OLC Memo points out that the Supreme Court’s actual holding “focused on [the defendants’] conduct behind enemy lines. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 1:10 pm
Diss.: C.J. [read post]
