Search for: "People v. Little (1983)" Results 1 - 20 of 448
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2012, 8:09 am by James Eckert
  Thus, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, a rational fact finder could conclude that defendant acquired the video and exercised control over it and the images (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]). [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 2:46 pm
Water that is diverted for purposes of irrigation, however, 'is not deemed severed and thus remains [realty]' (13 Witkin, supra, § 91, p. 113); 'In the case of water for irrigation, delivered in ditches or pipes, the severance does not take place at all'.In a usually overlooked part of People v. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 10:28 pm
But the courts do surprise us with a little municipal liability from time to time.The case is Okin v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 2:05 pm
We recently rejected a similar argument in People v. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 5:27 am by Will Baude
(The Senate spent little time debating before passing the 1874 Revised Statutes.) [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 11:41 am
You'll know where this case is going even when I just recite the first paragraphs of the statement of facts:"In 1983, eight-year-old James K. met defendant at the Santa Monica Pier. [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 10:01 am by Betsy McKenzie
Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) which could have been used as precedent. [read post]
12 Mar 2019, 10:38 am by Eugene Volokh
Bedford Township, 463 U.S. 1341, 1343 (1983) (Brennan, J., in chambers); Fantasy Book Shop, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 9:45 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Cir.1983) (“The claim being invalid there is nothing to beinfringed. [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 11:45 am by Eric Goldman
VOTERS: I ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE OUT ANYONE SO ILL-EQUIPPED FOR THE JOB OF REPRESENTING “THE PEOPLE. [read post]
5 Mar 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  In chapters on how juries and judges decide Section 1983 disputes, Schwartz shows that relatively few cases (under 7%) go to trial, adding that “federal juries. . .disproportionately exclude people of color, poor people, people with criminal records, and people who have had negative experiences with the police. [read post]