Search for: "State v. Texas City" Results 721 - 740 of 2,806
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Dec 2015, 7:29 am by Amy Howe
Abbott, the “one person, one vote” challenge to Texas’s state legislative maps, also continue. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 1:25 pm by Gritsforbreakfast
For an example of how to analyze appellate records to identify this type of prosecutor misconduct, see a study of California cases by the Veritas Institute.Police records a gap in the system: Prosecutors cannot disclose records of police misconduct in Texas civil service cities governed by the state civil-service code: about 74 police departments out of nearly 2,000 statewide. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 9:09 am by Don Cruse
Rehearing denied in the “billion dollar” civil-service case City of Dallas v. [read post]
10 Oct 2011, 8:13 am by Steve Hall
The landmark 1963 United States Supreme Court decision Brady v. [read post]
16 May 2009, 4:06 am
EEO/iNews from State CourtsiNews Related to Equal Employment Opportunity Source: iNews © 2009 John D. [read post]
29 Sep 2014, 1:56 pm by Robert Guest
City of Marion, 918 F.2d 1178, 1183 (5th Cir.1990), abrogated on other grounds as recognized in Martin v. [read post]
5 Feb 2010, 7:22 am by Mark S. Humphreys
Residents of Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Grand Prairie, Weatherford, or any any city or town in Texas can be adversely affected by these arbitration clauses in the insurance policy. [read post]
ROBERT SCOTT, HONORABLECOMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS, THORNTON KEEL, DONNA KEEL, MICHAEL HELLRUNG, DONNA HELLRUNG, WILLIAM PASCHALL, DAVID WOMACK, NATALIE KLOSS, DARRYL HUBBELL AND AMY HUBBELL; from Travis County; 3rd district (03-07-00576-CV, 275 SW3d 558, 11-14-08, pet. denied Sep. 2009)09-0138CITY OF AUSTIN, ET AL. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2016, 5:29 am by John Floyd
  Depending on the nature of the drug offense, charges can be brought under Texas state law, federal law, or both state and federal laws. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 7:02 am by Eric Goldman
Because “[t]he link between fantasy and intent is too tenuous for fantasy [alone] to be probative,” United States v. [read post]