Search for: "State v. Modica"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2007, 9:10 am
The study of pro se defendants (post earlier today) reminds me of a recent Washington case where the defendant who chose to represent himself lost on appeal, forced to live with the consequences of his waiver of counsel: State v. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 5:21 am
Modica, 164 Wash.2d 83, 186 P.3d 1062 (Washington Supreme Court 2008).State v. [read post]
6 May 2005, 5:01 pm
In United States v. [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 7:28 am
See Modica v. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 5:03 pm
Modica, 4 N.J. 383, 391-92 (1950) ("to be actionable, fraud must relate to a present or pre-existing fact and cannot ordinarily be predicated on representations which involve things to be done in the future"); Alexander v. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 12:14 pm
" Modica at 638. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 5:08 am
Carver, 169 F.3d 683, 687 (11th Cir. 1999) (holding individual public employees are not 'employers' under the FMLA), with Modica v. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 3:01 pm
Although the Privacy Act doesn’t define a private communication, in State v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 5:20 am
See Modica v. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 7:15 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Oct 2023, 6:15 pm
Co. v Campbell (538 US 408 [2003]), and Gomez v Cabatic (159 AD3d 62 [2d Dept 2018]). [read post]
