Search for: "McCarthy v. State of Maine"
Results 1 - 20
of 85
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Nov 2015, 9:25 am
Maine is suing the EPA over agency action concerning the State’s surface water quality standards. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 12:48 pm
See, Brady v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 12:48 pm
McCarthy successfully litigated a defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. [read post]
11 Aug 2017, 1:37 pm
Maine v. [read post]
11 Aug 2017, 1:37 pm
Maine v. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 12:07 pm
McCarthy and Samuel B. [read post]
14 Sep 2020, 1:18 pm
by guest blogger Kieran McCarthy Compulife Software, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2022, 7:25 am
In this post, Tara McCarthy and James Warshaw, associates in the litigation team at CMS, preview the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Brake and Anor v Chedington Court Estate Ltd. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 3:12 pm
" Provident Bank v. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 3:12 pm
" Provident Bank v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 8:36 am
As Kieran McCarthy has pointed out, in several of its recent opinions, including this one, the Northern District cited and relied on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in HiQ v. [read post]
17 Jan 2010, 3:11 am
Based on the recent Supreme Court decision of Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 2:40 am
The Court cites McCarthy v SoS for Home Department and Abdirahman v SoS for Work and Pensions in support, and explained (politely) a comment made by Kay LJ in Kaczmarek v SoS for Work and Pensions (at [23]) as well as R(Badar) v Ealing LBC (irrelevant as right of residence was not contested). [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 2:40 am
The Court cites McCarthy v SoS for Home Department and Abdirahman v SoS for Work and Pensions in support, and explained (politely) a comment made by Kay LJ in Kaczmarek v SoS for Work and Pensions (at [23]) as well as R(Badar) v Ealing LBC (irrelevant as right of residence was not contested). [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 1:34 pm
Maine Med. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 3:59 am
Moran v McCarthy, Safrath & Carbone, P.C., 31 AD3d 725; Terio v Spodek, 25 AD3d 781). [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 10:34 am
(See Bruni v. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 2:05 pm
Proportionally restricting free speech rights In Murphy v IRTC Barrington J explained that, when there is a restriction on a constitutional right, the state can justify it if it meets a legitimate aim and is proportionate to that aim. [read post]
13 Jul 2015, 8:37 am
You most likely did, if you look at Judge McGuire's Order earlier this month in McCarthy v. [read post]
25 Jan 2024, 9:36 am
Ark. 2019) (stating that “[t]he fact that the [confidentiality] Agreement does not state a time limitation, but instead applies forever, further supports a finding that it is unenforceable”); Howard Schultz & Assocs. v. [read post]
