Search for: "State v. Blakey"
Results 1 - 20
of 34
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2022, 5:14 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey In City of San Mateo, et al v. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 6:44 am
(Separately, a parallel private action, Ploss v. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 4:38 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey Recall our recent post on Carl v. [read post]
12 Apr 2016, 1:44 pm
Root Consulting Inc. v. [read post]
22 Nov 2021, 5:13 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey Ammonite Oil and Gas Corporation v. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 4:58 am
Was Stingray Pressure Pumping, LLC v. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 7:28 am
The district court also reopened the case and directed the parties to either reach a new settlement or to prepare to agree to a trial date at a hearing set for late November (CFTC v. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 8:10 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey* Cardoso-Gonzales v. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 5:05 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey Zehentbauer Family Land, LP v. [read post]
10 Dec 2021, 4:54 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey The Texas Supreme Court has granted petition for review of a 2019 decision in Dyer et al v. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 9:32 am
Kraft Foods Group, Inc., August 14, 2019, Blakey, J.). [read post]
18 Jan 2023, 4:45 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey The takeaway from Hahn v. [read post]
9 Nov 2021, 4:29 am
The central issue in Tier 1 Resources Partners v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 4:29 am
In Hughes v. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 6:30 am
Further, Kohen v. [read post]
28 Apr 2021, 4:20 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey The central issue in the Texas case of Cook v. [read post]
4 May 2021, 4:22 am
Co-author Brittany Blakey The Texas Supreme Court in Concho Resources, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 11:50 am
’” Blakey v. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 10:07 am
Also, at the center of the document release is the CFTC’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus, where the propriety of the lower court proceeding, as well as the conduct of District Court Judge Blakey, are questioned (CFTC v. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 12:43 pm
One, he argued that the trial court judge had engaged in impermissible fact finding under Blakey v. [read post]
