Search for: "State v. Callahan" Results 141 - 160 of 423
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Sep 2016, 2:11 pm
Judge Smith authors a dissent from a denial of rehearing en banc in an ERISA case today, joined by Judges O'Scannlain, Tallman, Gould, Bybee, Callahan, Bea, and Ikuta. [read post]
2 Sep 2016, 11:19 am by Jon Sands
Paramo, No. 14-56946 (8-30-16)(Callahan w/Clifton and Ikuta). [read post]
21 Aug 2016, 8:09 am
He left us a few years back and went first to the General Jurisdiction and then to the Family Division where he serves today.He will tell you that his favorite case ever sitting as a Judge was the case of State of Florida v. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 9:23 pm by Sme
 (10th Cir., July 19, 2016) (affirming summary judgement in favor of Aerotek on Hollis's race and disability discrimination claims)*Callahan v. [read post]
26 Jul 2016, 10:54 am by Kent Scheidegger
§ 1983.Judge Ikuta wrote the opinion, joined in full by Judges Rawlinson, Clifton, Callahan, and Randy Smith. [read post]
11 Jun 2016, 10:19 am by David Kopel
The concealed carry ban in the new state of Kentucky was soon ruled unconstitutional in Bliss v. [read post]
16 Mar 2016, 6:43 am by Joy Waltemath
The Geo Group, Inc. dba Arizona State Prison-Florence West and Central Arizona Correctional Facility, March 14, 2016, Callahan, C.). [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 2:28 pm by Steve Vladeck
But rather than stop there (as the Court's 2009 decision in Pearson v. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 8:57 am by Jon Sands
Davis, No. 09-99005 (per curiam; panel is Reinhardt, Wardlaw, and Callahan) --- On remand from the United States Supreme Court, see Davis v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 9:49 am by Jon Sands
Schriro, Nos. 96-99025, 96-99026, 10-99011 (Reinhardt with Schroeder, dissent by Callahan) --- The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of an Arizona state prisoner's claim that he was ineligible to be executed under Atkins v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:52 pm
"Judge Callahan holds, however, that there's precisely such “clearly irreconcilable” intervening authority: Sorrell v. [read post]