Search for: "People v. Young (1983)"
Results 1 - 20
of 203
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Nov 2023, 9:01 pm
§ 1983, and the so-called Ex Parte Young action. [read post]
8 May 2012, 8:09 am
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]
4 Nov 2011, 7:09 pm
People v. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 10:38 am
Here we have a young guy who's profoundly screwed up even as a youngster. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 11:26 am
§ 1983. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:54 am
Comment This case is significant for two reasons: First, it tasks the Supreme Court with answering the question raised obiter by Lady Hale in Savage v South Essex NHS Trust [2009] 1 AC 653, namely “what is the extent of the state’s duty to protect all people against an immediate risk of self-harm? [read post]
25 Nov 2010, 4:00 pm
Young, 7 Haw. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 6:50 am
Cuomo, and Young v. [read post]
11 May 2007, 5:46 am
§ 1983, should be interpreted to exclude claims under federal statutes and regulations. [read post]
24 Mar 2022, 2:32 pm
Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983). [read post]
1 May 2012, 8:44 am
Many observers feared that the Court would use Douglas to impose on Ex parte Young doctrine the restrictive private-right-of-action test that it had applied to Section 1983 in Gonzaga University v. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 10:35 pm
The Queen, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 29; Reid v. [read post]
23 Feb 2020, 7:17 pm
In Young v. [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 4:09 am
The police were then contacted (R. 135).Snell said that it was not difficult to go under the house to seewhere the depression was located, and that there were houses onboth sides of the DeCarr residence, and people from those houses could see what they were doing (R. 138-39). [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 6:42 pm
’ Young v Catoe, 205 F3d 750, 759 (4th Cir.2000). [read post]
2 May 2011, 4:06 am
Buck v. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 1:16 pm
§ 1983. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 6:57 am
Normally, in a civil rights case under Section 1983, you sue the individual public officer/wrongdoer. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 6:30 am
He tries to reassure those people that they `are not in trouble’ and that, even though medical treatment is expensive, their immediate health is more important than the cost. [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 4:30 am
§1983, was construed by SCOTUS in Will v. [read post]
