Search for: "State v. Huff"
Results 141 - 160
of 176
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Dec 2009, 9:51 pm
HALMAN, SAM ARMSTRONG, ALEX CARBAJAL, ROGER FARRINGTON, CURTIS HUFF, AND TITO BETANCUR v. [read post]
13 Sep 2016, 6:04 am
It also determined that the sheriff was not required to allow her a two-year convalescence period following reemployment before terminating her employment (Huff v. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 6:13 am
Huff Docket: 11-208 Issue: (1) Whether Brigham City v. [read post]
16 Jun 2021, 7:56 am
It did so, in large part, due to the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Huff v. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 4:20 am
These facts are sufficient to state a claim for promissory estoppel.* Multimedia Patent Trust v. [read post]
29 Sep 2015, 5:30 am
v=DVLVZ-ODYRY. [read post]
29 Sep 2015, 5:30 am
v=DVLVZ-ODYRY. [read post]
12 Jan 2018, 12:42 pm
In doing so, Trump will flout an expectation ostensibly settled by Watergate, in the course of which the Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]
9 Jun 2013, 5:48 am
Alabama, which Huffman and [Harris County DA Mike] Anderson would prefer to ignore.)Right now, Texas law complies with Miller v. [read post]
15 Aug 2022, 3:23 pm
United States Servicemen’s Fund and Bogan v. [read post]
25 Mar 2018, 4:25 pm
The Huff Post suggests that UKIP faces being wound up. [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 6:37 pm
In 2013, the Court of Appeals in Wisconsin in Habush v. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 5:57 am
Huff, 767 P.2d 572, 576 (Wash. 1989), but it did not provide a definition for the other proscribed purposes. [read post]
22 Aug 2008, 11:11 pm
Huff and Russell C. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 4:22 am
It may lead to the US leaving the WTO in a huff, but that may be repaired under a future administration. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am
Wiretap Act (also known as Title III) prohibits the interception of a live communication (e.g., a telephone call) only if the interception occurs in the United States; it does not prohibit or regulate wiretaps (interception) conducted abroad.[8] Similarly, the U.S. [read post]
29 Dec 2023, 2:52 pm
From Keisel v. [read post]
11 Jun 2016, 4:16 am
See Jordan v. [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 8:11 am
Mukasey, No. 05-4448 Petition for review of a decision denying petitioner asylum and related relief, and finding that he was removable due to a prior state conviction for possession of a controlled substance, is denied where a remand was unnecessary because petitioner's challenge to the state court conviction constituted an impermissible collateral attack, and he presented no other claims that would entitle him to relief. [read post]
2 Aug 2021, 10:05 am
Winn & Sims, decided in June by Judge Marilyn Huff (S.D. [read post]
