Search for: "Patterson v. Municipal Court"
Results 1 - 20
of 40
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Nov 2019, 2:52 pm
Metz DA 18-0360 2019 MT 264 Criminal – Municipal Court Appeal [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 9:27 am
Reid Road Municipal Utility District No. 2 v. [read post]
12 Apr 2021, 6:47 am
The police then realized they had the wrong person and they let him go.The case is Ketcham v. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 10:51 am
The municipal court sentenced Mr. [read post]
18 May 2016, 7:54 am
The plaintiff in the case of Deschenes v. [read post]
4 Aug 2020, 1:07 pm
” Monster Trash, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 12:19 pm
Patterson, 73 N.C. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 10:29 am
The landowner's actions relying on a valid permit must be so substantial that the municipal action results in serious loss rendering the improvements essentially valueless" (Town of Orangetown v Magee, 88 NY2d at 47-48; see Glacial Aggregates LLC v Town of Yorkshire, 14 NY3d at 136; People v Miller, 304 NY at 109; Matter of RC Enters. v Town of Patterson, 42 AD3d at 544; People ex rel. [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 8:21 am
In Utility Center, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 9:39 am
In Town of Cedar Lake v. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 9:03 pm
Vigorito, Barker, Patterson, Nichols & Porter, LLP, Valhalla, NY (Leilani J. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 9:03 pm
Vigorito, Barker, Patterson, Nichols & Porter, LLP, Valhalla, NY (Leilani J. [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 12:58 pm
Among others, the court examined Koontz v. [read post]
19 Jan 2022, 3:44 am
Lapsley v. [read post]
28 Jul 2007, 9:16 am
In the case of RC Enterprises v. [read post]
28 Jul 2007, 9:16 am
In the case of RC Enterprises v. [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 10:58 am
By James Pugh & Dave Lanferman On October 22, 2009, the California Supreme Court decided not to review the Court of Appeal's decision in the landmark Palmer/Sixth Street Properties v. [read post]
3 Jun 2010, 8:50 pm
Hasselstrom tried to escape from Spokane Municipal Court. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 8:31 am
Patterson, 122 N.J.L. 81, 84 (E. [read post]
25 Jun 2009, 11:59 am
Case to watch: Casitas Municipal Water District v. [read post]