Search for: "Goldstein v. California"
Results 481 - 500
of 560
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Aug 2011, 8:36 am
Goldstein, Bernard D., M.D. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 7:28 am
Title: Filarsky v. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 6:34 am
In Cavazos, California again seeks review of the Ninth Circuit’s grant of habeas relief under Jackson v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 6:30 am
California, 10-5479 (held since 1/7/11, probably for Bullcoming) Carrigan v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 3:25 pm
Summers v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 12:40 pm
(Goldstein, Howe & Russell is counsel of record for petitioner in Zuress.) [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 6:53 am
Plata, the California prison-overcrowding case, also continue. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 6:48 am
[Disclosure: Goldstein, Howe & Russell filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in the case.] [read post]
17 May 2011, 6:38 pm
Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell represents the petitioner in this case. [read post]
10 May 2011, 4:43 pm
Title: Aquino v. [read post]
1 May 2011, 10:34 am
”Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog calls the 5-4 decision in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 7:09 am
[Disclosure: Goldstein, Howe & Russell represents one set of respondents in the case.] [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 9:20 am
See, e.g., Imbler v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 4:06 pm
As a law clerk in the Central District of California, I read a lot of crap. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 5:05 pm
Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp. and Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 1:59 pm
This letter is submitted on behalf of the California Hedge Fund Association and the Florida Alternative Investment Association. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 1:38 am
Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell represents the petitioner in this case, which is listed without regard to its likelihood of being granted.Title: Zuress v. [read post]
5 Feb 2011, 3:31 pm
District Court for the Northern District of California in Pecover. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 9:57 am
Title: City of Santa Rosa, California v. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 6:35 am
[Disclosure: Goldstein, Howe & Russell represents respondent IMS Health in the case.] [read post]