Search for: "State v. Ashburn"
Results 1 - 20
of 44
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Apr 2007, 10:36 am
Finally, even if the Court were to adopt the state created danger doctrine here, there were no affirmative acts by the State in this instance, and the Court therefore declined to decide the application of the doctrine in this case.Turning to the negligence claim, the Court looked to the "seminal" Ashburn case for guidance, and found that there must be a "special relationship" between the officer and the individual in order to create a duty to that… [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 5:00 am
No, said a Texas court in Enerquest Oil & Gas, LLC v. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 5:15 am
Bonds v. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 10:59 am
We have not yet had an occasion to interpret the fee-shifting provisions of the URA.One finds:United States v. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 8:00 am
Gonzalez v. [read post]
28 Jul 2017, 8:00 am
Cohan v. [read post]
25 Sep 2018, 8:00 am
Cantore v. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 8:00 am
Alex Argotte, M.D. v. [read post]
7 Mar 2018, 10:19 am
In Cannon v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 1:57 pm
Ashburn, 88 F. [read post]
3 May 2018, 8:00 am
In 2013, the rates were 33% in cap states and 32.1% in states without caps. [read post]
3 May 2018, 8:00 am
In 2013, the rates were 33% in cap states and 32.1% in states without caps. [read post]
9 Sep 2021, 8:00 am
Avilez v. [read post]
20 Jul 2018, 8:00 am
Mann v. [read post]
20 Jul 2018, 8:00 am
Mann v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 3:00 am
Waterhouse v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 11:20 am
” Sypniewski v. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 12:03 pm
Nelson v. [read post]
19 Jul 2016, 12:40 pm
Lucido v. [read post]
