Search for: "Nichols v. State" Results 81 - 100 of 606
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Apr 2008, 2:27 am
Thanks to Paige Nichols, who alerted me to the fact that Jean Gilles Phillips of the Kansas Defender Project won a 2254 petition in Tomlin v. [read post]
17 Jun 2008, 5:55 pm
John Nichols wrote a great article for The South Carolina Lawyer Bulletin for Spring 2008 discussing the admissibility of expert's opinions pursuant to Rule 702, and the lack of necessity for South Carolina to adopt the federal standard described as Daubert for the infamous 1993 decision Daubert v. [read post]
24 Jul 2010, 10:04 am by INFORRM
  Pill LJ pointed out that, in an analysis of the law of fair comment in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal case of Tse Wai Chun Pau v Albert Cheng ([2001] EMLR 31), Lord Nicholls had said “the comment must explicitly or implicitly indicate, at least in general terms, what are the facts on which the comment is being made. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 5:10 pm by Evan George
I asked the UCLA Emmett Institute’s Distinguished Counsel Mary Nichols to share her thoughts after reading the decision in Held v. [read post]
22 May 2011, 9:11 pm
Nichols, 512 F.3d 789, 794 (6th Cir. 2008), overruled on other grounds by United States v. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Vestal, Religious State Constitution Preambles, 123 Pennsylvania State Law Review 151-190 (2018). [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 4:35 pm by INFORRM
Lord Phillips also re-named the defence as “honest comment” (as opposed to Court of Appeal in BCA v Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350, which favoured “honest opinion” [35]) and called on the Law Commission to consider and review the present state of the defence. [read post]
24 Feb 2007, 4:24 am
  Opinion     Pub Date          Short Title/District 07a0068p.06 2007/02/20 Nichols v. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 12:26 pm by Liisa Speaker
Citing Mayor of Cadillac v Blackburn, 306 Mich App 512, 522; 857 NW2d 529 (2014), the Court of Appeals concluded that because relevant statutes do not state which standard of evidence a Probate Court should require for the removal of a guardian, the default standard of a preponderance of the evidence should be applied. [read post]