Search for: "State v. Apt"
Results 101 - 120
of 880
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Nov 2018, 12:52 pm
General Observations About the Work Streams V. [read post]
5 Apr 2022, 4:26 am
In its judgment of 15 March 2022 in the case of OOO Memo v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 9:02 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
15 Nov 2019, 3:42 am
An earlier domestic judgment, R v Zardad, also supported the position that a person acting on behalf of a non-State entity may be acting in an official capacity for the purposes of s 134 if the non-State entity “had a sufficient degree of organisation, a sufficient degree of actual control of an area and […] exercised the type of functions which a government or governmental organisation would exercise” [63]. [read post]
15 Jun 2007, 12:48 pm
It found this Wisconsin Law Journal article dated June 1, 2005, stating:In Karraker v. [read post]
18 Dec 2006, 1:29 pm
Apt v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 8:46 am
My prior post discussing Wal-Mart v. [read post]
16 Oct 2008, 8:38 pm
The Stones' "It's All Over Now" would have been a more apt choice. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 4:20 pm
Previously we noted, here and here, the First Circuit case of Kosilek v. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 1:45 pm
While under Comcast, a stage II damages proceeding is not apt to be certified, plaintiffs then cite Teamsters v. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 9:01 pm
The problem is, just two years ago, in Walker v. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 11:33 am
United States, 235 P.3d 42 (Cal. 2010) (The statutory phrase “keep the premises safe” is an apt description of the property-based duties underlying premises liability, a liability category that does not include vehicular negligence.) [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 8:35 am
For one example of how appellate courts treat the magician argument, see State v. [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 7:39 pm
The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held in Rodgers v. [read post]
25 Nov 2011, 9:10 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 3:15 am
Case Name: Sam v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 3:15 am
Case Name: Sam v. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 9:46 am
It is however an established principle of Strasbourg jurisprudence that such a right does not extend so far as to impose a positive obligation on public authorities to disclose or distribute information (see Leander v Sweden (1987) 9 EHRR 433 or Roche v United Kingdom (2005) 42 EHRR 599). [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 9:09 pm
” United States v. [read post]
9 Feb 2009, 5:26 pm
State Farm Fire & Cas. [read post]
