Search for: "People v Ortiz (David)" Results 1 - 20 of 21
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Nov 2019, 10:30 am by Stephen Bilkis
In a possession of a controlled substance case, the court considered whether the police officers properly stopped and arrested the defendant for disorderly conduct. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 11:25 am by James Bickford
Video Software Dealers Association and Ortiz v. [read post]
23 Jan 2020, 4:00 am by Edith Roberts
Amy Howe analyzes yesterday’s argument in Espinoza v. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 6:35 am by Jay Willis
The Associated Press previews Ortiz v. [read post]
14 Sep 2020, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Above all that, it was clearly wrongly decided, and illustrates how some judges have bad interpretive instincts when it comes to navigating the tricky but ultra-important voting rights realm.The case, Texas Democratic Party v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 11:58 am by Victoria Clark
Harry Graver summarized the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ortiz v. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 8:17 am
Ortiz v Camm-Way in 2008 was case concerning an obscure part of the section which prevented the invalidation of the use as herald or a city name. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 12:28 am by centerforartlaw
Sarah Andersen, Kelly McKernan, and Karla Ortiz challenge the defendants’ use of images of their artwork, registered with the U.S. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 9:04 pm by CAPTAIN
feature=player_embedded&v=wyx6JDQCslE&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fs.ytimg.com%2Fyt%2Fswfbin%2Fwatch_as3-vfl3J-I2Q.swf&has_verified=1COUNTY COURTTop rated as Exceptionally Qualified: Judge Steve Leifman - 54%Judge Andrea Wolfson - 52%Judge Charlie Johnson - 49%Judge Sam Slom - 47% Lowest Percentage of Unqualified votes: Judge Luise Krieger Martin - 5.10%Judge Leifman - 5.35%Judge Slom - 5.41%Judge Johnson - 5.60%Judge Shelly Kravitz - 5.67% Highest Percentage of… [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
The other day, I was blogging about tags, and somebody asked what are all the tags. [read post]
16 Aug 2018, 9:06 am by Charlotte Garden
The timing suggested that the employer may have investigated its employees’ immigration status because it was unhappy with the results of a union election; as the majority opinion, written by Judge David Tatel, noted, “the company claimed that after the election it put the Social Security numbers given by all the voting employees into the Social Security Administration’s online database and discovered that most of the numbers were either nonexistent or belonged to other… [read post]