Search for: "Langford v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 69
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jan 2009, 6:18 am
United States v. [read post]
26 May 2017, 6:29 am
Langford, 16-886 Issues: (1) Whether a state court unreasonably applied this court’s cases under Section 2254(d)(1) when it held that a misplaced adverb in one jury instruction on state law did not violate federal due process; and (2) whether the U.S. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 9:53 am
Schiro No. 18-0278 (Tex. 2019) (attorney fee award based on fee-shifting statute reversed and remanded for redetermination).Cognate Place Name ROHRMOOS VENTURE, ERIC LANGFORD, DAN BASSO, AND TOBIN GROVE, Petitioners,v.UTSW DVA HEALTHCARE, LLP, Respondent. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 3:47 pm
SOURCE: DALLAS COURT OF APPEALS - 05-10-00173-CV - 12/15/11 The Homebuyers' attorney stated his attorney's fees were $29,944.75, and he had deleted $5477.50 from his bills relating to the proceedings against Langford. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 6:44 am
In Reyes v Jeffcoat, 2012 WL 2428587 (D.S.C.) the Petitioner, Maritza Meszaros Reyes and the Respondent, Harry Lee Langford Jeffcoat were married and had three children, one of whom was over the age of 16. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 7:15 am
Langford, issued on June 8. [read post]
19 Apr 2023, 7:51 am
Dominion v. [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 4:00 am
Law):Shital Prakash Kharat, Effect of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 – Judicial Response, (February 6, 2017).Grant Robert Hooper, From the Magna Carta to Bentham to Modern Australian Judicial Review: Themes of Practicality and Spirituality, (Australian Institute of Administrative Law (AIAL) Forum, Vol. 84, pp. 22-44, 2016).From SSRN (LGBT Rights):Reva Siegel, Same-Sex Marriage and Backlash: Consensus, Conflict, and Constitutional Culture, (February 9, 2017).Susan Frelich Appleton,… [read post]
24 May 2017, 2:22 pm
Langford 16-886 Issues: (1) Whether a state court unreasonably applied this court’s cases under Section 2254(d)(1) when it held that a misplaced adverb in one jury instruction on state law did not violate federal due process; and (2) whether the U.S. [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 1:36 pm
See Langford v. [read post]
13 Feb 2021, 4:05 am
Langford v. [read post]
25 Jan 2020, 1:59 pm
Randy Beck and John Langford argued for the revival of qui tam statutes as a check on executive officials. [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 4:34 pm
From Westenbroek v. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 6:33 am
In Valard Construction Ltd. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 5:00 am
Hill, 147 N.E.2d 321, 325 (Ill. 1958) (“a vested right to punitive, exemplary, vindictive or aggravated damages arises only when such damages have been allowed by a judgment); Langford v. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 5:00 am
Hill, 147 N.E.2d 321, 325 (Ill. 1958) (“a vested right to punitive, exemplary, vindictive or aggravated damages arises only when such damages have been allowed by a judgment); Langford v. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 3:08 pm
Rick Seller did not respond to Langford's question, and Langford asked, “Where did you spray? [read post]
15 Jul 2022, 4:07 pm
From Weisenbach v. [read post]
29 May 2010, 11:33 am
United States to Al-Haramain v. [read post]
2 May 2020, 1:07 pm
United States, 290 U.S. 13, 16 (1933)); see United States v. [read post]
