Search for: "Sheffield v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 122
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2023, 10:38 am
Co. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 6:07 pm
X v. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 2:10 pm
The post JAMAL SHEFFIELD v. [read post]
22 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
A second follow-up case, Steinmetz et al v Germany, was filed in 2022. [read post]
25 Jun 2022, 5:59 am
At The University of Chicago Law School, Ginsburg stated on the 40th anniversary of Roe v. [read post]
12 Jun 2022, 6:30 am
Thus, for those frustrated with (or openly hostile to) particular elements of the Constitution, such as Article V, brevity has provided a path forward. [read post]
6 May 2022, 4:39 pm
Shahid Akbar Abbasi v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 8:00 am
Smart Study Co. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 9:00 am
There was therefore no error in the case. (1) Defendant’s challenge to the second step of the Batson analysis was preserved; (2) The State’s proffered explanations for its use of peremptory challenges were racially neutral; (3) The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the defendant failed to show purposeful discrimination under the totality of circumstances State v. [read post]
13 Apr 2021, 9:53 am
The case, Brom and Bett v. [read post]
26 Oct 2020, 3:00 am
Scottsdale Insurance Company v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 8:00 am
Bonness v. [read post]
3 Jul 2020, 4:13 pm
EgyptSaeed Ahmed Hassan v. [read post]
27 May 2020, 8:00 am
Taylor v. [read post]
20 Feb 2020, 8:00 am
Brauner v. [read post]
5 Feb 2020, 2:00 am
Eyster v. [read post]
1 Feb 2020, 5:57 am
Liberty, which is appealing the decision on behalf of Mr Bridges (the appeal is due to be heard in June 2020), has said that the MPS’s deployment of FRT is a ‘dangerous and sinister step, pushing us towards a surveillance state in which our freedom to live our lives free from state interference no longer exists. [read post]
22 Jan 2020, 2:00 am
Doe v. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 2:00 am
Van den Heuvel v. [read post]
6 Oct 2019, 3:48 am
In AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin set out the importance of claimants (and their lawyers) setting out a clear and consistent basis for seeking anonymity in civil proceedings. [read post]
