Search for: "STATE v. CARRASCO"
Results 1 - 20
of 22
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Aug 2007, 5:06 am
SENTENCINGUnited States v. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 4:00 am
Descarga el documento: United States v. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 2:35 pm
The Carrascos then sued the firm in California state court, alleging legal malpractice. [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 4:41 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2015, 3:05 pm
” Tone-Loc, Funky Cold Medina.United States v. [read post]
1 Sep 2008, 1:53 pm
State v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 4:12 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:48 am
Carrasco v. [read post]
12 Nov 2011, 9:20 pm
State v. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 4:00 am
Implications for Public Administration from Trinity Lutheran v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 1:40 pm
Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. [read post]
26 Feb 2009, 7:36 am
State v. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 4:39 am
"The Second Department of the Appellate Division recently stated in Kluczka v Lecci (63 AD3d 796 [2009]) that: "[i]n order to prevail in an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession, and that the breach of this duty proximately caused the plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable… [read post]
26 Nov 2010, 12:30 pm
Gonzales, Carrasco, and another bank employee, Brittany Rogers, testified that Rasmussen raised his crutch as if he were going to use it to strike Gonzales and Carrasco. [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 2:32 pm
Two more summary orders of interest:In United States v. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 7:47 am
United States v. [read post]
18 May 2017, 6:53 am
” United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2024, 6:50 pm
The Court concluded there were extensive human rights violations and ordered the State to provide specialized medical assistance to the victims, pay compensation for both material losses and pain and suffering, and publicly acknowledge its wrongdoing. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:17 pm
Carrasco, No. 061887, 061888 Convictions for possession of cocaine and heroin are vacated and remanded where: 1) the district court plainly misremembered its own ruling and the state of the docket; 2) admission of one defendant's confession to impeach him may have made the difference between his conviction and his acquittal; and 3) district court's reversal of its own ruling, with no consideration for the reliance of the parties and after other defendant had already… [read post]
