Search for: "People v. Jones (1991)" Results 1 - 20 of 94
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Feb 2010, 1:02 pm by Erin Miller
Indeed, three years after Jones, in Griffin v. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 6:38 pm by Donald Thompson
 Such a motion is waived, however, if not made within five days of arraignment (see also, People v Jones, 187 AD2d 750 [3rd Dept 1992], lv den, 81 NY2d 790 [1993]), although in some cases, discussed below, that five-day deadline may be extended. [read post]
18 Nov 2007, 8:47 pm
Schwab Case No. 05-1991-CF-7249-AXXX acquittal on retrial.' Scott, 604 So.2d at 468 (quoting Jones v. [read post]
26 May 2016, 3:00 am by Nicandro Iannacci
Jones (2012), opening a door to the expansion of privacy rights; her dissent in Glossip v. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 6:44 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
An Ontario Court of Appeal decision today, Jones v. [read post]
3 Oct 2015, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
” The Court then went on to consider an alternative basis for striking out, namely abuse of the process of the Court The Jameel principle (deriving from Dow Jones & Co Inc v Jameel [2005] EWCA Civ 75) is used frequently in the United Kingdom  to strike out libel actions as an abuse of process and has been raised in one reported Ontario case (Goldhar v et al., 2015 ONSC 1128) without success However libel actions have been struck out as an abuse… [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 6:57 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
This case generated extensive news coverage in Connecticut, including a good summary of the oral argument in January 2012.The case is Jones v. [read post]
5 Mar 2016, 2:06 pm by Giles Peaker
Jones v London Borough of Southwark [2016] EWHC 457 (Ch) Quite a lot of councils have agreements with water suppliers under which the council will collect water charges from their tenants, effectively as an addition to the rent. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 4:27 pm by Will Baude
Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm’n, 947 F.2d 1483, 1485 (11th Cir. 1991) (following “binding precedent in Atlas Roofing Co. v. [read post]