Search for: "U.S. v. Maya*"
Results 81 - 100
of 117
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2021, 7:10 pm
Although no rule or statute prohibits side switching, state and federal courts have exercised what they have called an inherent power to supervise and control ethical breaches by lawyers and expert witnesses.[1] The Wang Test Although certainly not the first case on side-switching, the decision of a federal trial court, in Wang Laboratories, Inc. v Toshiba Corp., has become a key precedent on disqualification of expert witnesses.[2] The test spelled out in the Wang case has generally been… [read post]
6 Dec 2020, 4:45 pm
Canada In the case of Zoutman v. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 8:04 am
Vice reports that the EFF asked the U.S. [read post]
19 Nov 2018, 11:56 am
A selected Federal Government candidate will be assigned to the equivalent of Executive Schedule Level V. [read post]
22 May 2011, 4:34 am
V. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 11:46 am
Elenis, Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 7:40 am
“Decades after his U.S. [read post]
22 Aug 2022, 5:56 am
The Role of U.S. [read post]
11 Aug 2015, 6:41 am
Moiwana is located in the Marowijne district to the northeast (Photo credit: U.S. [read post]
11 Aug 2015, 6:41 am
Moiwana is located in the Marowijne district to the northeast (Photo credit: U.S. [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 1:25 pm
Supreme Court ruling in Omnicare Inc. v. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 11:29 am
Supreme Court Decision, Lingle v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 2:30 pm
Supreme Court in Gonzales v. [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 4:50 am
Additional Resources: Winn v. [read post]
12 Aug 2017, 2:15 pm
The Florida Supreme Court ruled in the 1989 decision of Mazzeo v. [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 7:00 am
Sources [1] Bikram’s Yoga Coll. of India, L.P. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 8:54 am
14 In Eldred v. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 2:15 pm
General Martins begins by calling Judge Pohl’s attention to the ‘ten-category framework’ from his 2014 discovery order in United States v. al Nashiri. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 11:56 am
(1) Despite the State’s repeated use of “moped” to describe the defendant’s vehicle, sufficient evidence existed to establish that the defendant’s vehicle met the statutory definition of “motor vehicle”; (2) New trial required where trial court plainly erred in failing to instruct the jury on the definition of “motor vehicle” State v. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 2:03 pm
And: William V. [read post]
