Search for: "State v. Tate" Results 141 - 160 of 406
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Aug 2020, 1:53 pm
’ ” (Id. at pp. 869-870; see also In re Tate (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 756, 764-765; People v. [read post]
24 May 2020, 4:06 pm by INFORRM
“The State cannot use criminal defamation cases to throttle democracy,” he observed. [read post]
16 Feb 2020, 4:52 pm by INFORRM
The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2020] EWCA Civ 104 (heard 21 and 22 January 2020). [read post]
9 Feb 2020, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
Last Week in the Courts On 4 to 7 February 2020 Warby J heard the trial in the case of Sube v News Group Newspapers. [read post]
8 Jan 2020, 6:39 am by Eric Penzer
In affirming the Surrogate’s determination, the Court relied heavily on the Second Department’s decision in Mayorga v Tate, 302 AD2d 11 (2d Dept 2002). [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 4:08 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In Mayorga v Tate (302 AD2d 11 [2d Dept 2002]), the assignee of the executor of the decedent’s estate brought a legal malpractice action against the decedent’s attorney and sought to obtain pretrial disclosure “of the file that [the attorney] maintained in connection with” his representation of the decedent (id. [read post]
14 Nov 2019, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar and Jason Mazzone
And so, following primary elections, the Republican Party nominated in his place Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 3:46 pm by Abbott & Kindermann
”  Justice Kagan argued that “[s]tate courts are—or at any rate, are supposed to be—the ‘ultimate expositors of state law,’” and “the corollary is that federal courts should refrain whenever possible from deciding novel or difficult state-law questions. [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 4:07 am by Edith Roberts
Supreme Court for argument time to support a challenge to New York City gun restrictions,” New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 2:59 pm by Juan C. Antúnez
Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572, 581, 99 S.Ct. 802, 59 L.Ed.2d 1 (1979) (quoting United States v. [read post]