Search for: "Murphy v. Coleman" Results 1 - 20 of 25
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jun 2016, 6:35 am by Steve Kalar
AFD Ben Coleman, Coleman & Balogh LLP.Facts: Murphy didn't pay his federal taxes. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 5:11 pm
ELLIOTT, AND KANE RUSSELL, COLEMAN & LOGAN, P.C.; from Dallas County; 5th district (05-05-01013-CV, 241 SW3d 689, 12-13-07)08-0084 MCALLEN HOSPITALS, L.P., ET AL. v. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 10:08 am by Carl Folsom
Coleman, No. 101,621 (May 14, 2010) (unpublished) Issue presented: Whether police officer illegally extended the duration of a traffic stop without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 4:36 am by William Ford
William Ford posted the Fourth Circuit’s ruling against President Trump’s travel ban in IRAP v. [read post]
23 May 2017, 12:40 pm by Jordan Brunner, Chris Mirasola
Looking to Coleman v Tennessee and Lee v Madigan, Wilkinson further argued that statutes should be read against granting military jurisdiction in criminal cases, particularly capital cases, and that no such intention should be ascribed to Congress without clear and direct language to that effect. [read post]
30 Jul 2016, 7:50 pm by The Blog Team
Scott, Coleman, Balogh & Scott LLP, San Diego, CA)   United States v. [read post]
15 Jul 2007, 2:33 pm
(For those interested, there is a long analysis of the concept of using outside counsel by Michael Dorf at Dorf on Law, an analysis directly at odds with this April 6, 2007 blog by Beck/Herrmann;)TortsProf has the jury verdict in a suit against basketball star Allen Iverson's bodyguards;This New York medical malpractice verdict comes courtesy of doctor-attorney Dainius Drukteinis, from NY Emergency Medicine, and involves the amputation of two fingers and delays in the ER with respect to… [read post]
26 Sep 2007, 2:48 am
Coleman, Jr., Professor of the Practice of Law, Duke University School of Law--Paul H. [read post]
28 May 2020, 5:29 am by Schachtman
Another vacuous response to a methodological challenge under Rule 702 is to label the challenge as “going to the weight, not the admissibility” of the challenged expert witness’s testimony. [read post]