Search for: "Shedd v. State"
Results 1 - 20
of 46
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2017, 7:27 pm
Part V will analyze the dissents of Judges Shedd and Agee and discuss the possible paths ahead following the Solicitor General’s appeal to the Supreme Court. [read post]
4 Jan 2008, 12:22 pm
In Bell v. [read post]
22 Sep 2007, 12:05 pm
For reasons that are not entirely clear to me, Judge Shedd in the case of Henry v. [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 1:08 pm
Yesterday in State of North Carolina v. [read post]
17 Aug 2007, 2:35 pm
On this latter point, Judge Shedd dissented, concluding that it would be appropriate to remand the case for retrial on punitive damages.The Court in Palmer v. [read post]
25 May 2017, 3:33 pm
Today's IRAP v. [read post]
26 May 2017, 10:12 am
IRAP v. [read post]
4 Jul 2013, 5:15 am
In Tepeyac v. [read post]
28 Mar 2019, 12:15 pm
New York, Chisholm v. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 3:06 pm
(In United States v. [read post]
15 May 2009, 7:04 am
In CACI, International, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Sep 2004, 12:28 pm
In United States v. [read post]
4th Circuit En Banc Upholds Preliminary Injunction Against Trump's Second Travel Ban Executive Order
25 May 2017, 1:11 pm
Judge Thacker also filed a concurring opinion, stating that he concurred even though he would not consider statements made by candidate Trump before he took the oath of office as relevant.Judges Niemeyer, Shedd and Agee, each writing a dissenting opinion concurred in by the others. [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 11:18 am
"Recognizing a split in the authority from other circuits, the Court joined with the more restrictive Ninth Circuit view stated in United States v. [read post]
4 Jun 2017, 6:30 am
Knauff v. [read post]
19 Jul 2019, 4:09 pm
Shedd? [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 5:00 am
Janus v. [read post]
15 May 2008, 7:37 am
The lethal injection index, with full coverage of Baze v. [read post]
9 May 2017, 6:20 am
Of the thirteen judges at the hearing in International Refugee Assistance Project v. [read post]
10 Jan 2008, 2:15 pm
The vote was 324-321, but the loser got a court order preventing the winner from taking office while the outcome is still in dispute.From the Fourth Circuit, in DirecTV, Inc. v. [read post]