Search for: "United States v. Corrigan"
Results 41 - 60
of 70
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Surgidev Corp., 899 P.2d 576, 591 (N.M. 1995) (“evidence of compliance with FDA regulations was properly submitted to the jury for consideration”); United Blood Services v. [read post]
13 Jan 2013, 4:09 pm
Ray Corrigan on the potential for Digital rights cyberlaw clinics Freedom of Expression Turned on its Head? [read post]
31 Dec 2012, 8:00 am
In Ralphs Grocery Company v. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 11:01 am
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, AFL-CIO v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm
Coito v. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 4:08 am
" Other cases addressing use immunity include Gardner v Broderick, 392 US 273 and People v Corrigan, 80 NY2d 326. [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 8:16 am
In Baker v. [read post]
13 May 2011, 11:29 am
” [Seabrook v Johnston, 660 NY2d 311, United States v Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115]. [read post]
13 May 2011, 11:29 am
” [Seabrook v Johnston, 660 NY2d 311, United States v Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115]. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 8:42 pm
Interestingly, the Supreme Court of the United States seems poised to reach the same result in AT&T Mobility, LLC v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 6:02 am
v. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 2:33 pm
The POUM Clause provides that the legislature may not mandate a new activity or increased level of activity of any unit of local government (such as a school district) unless the State pays the unit of local government for any associated increased costs. [read post]
7 May 2010, 3:25 am
Gardner v Broderick, 392 US 273 and People v Corrigan, 80 NY2d 326 discuss the parameters of immunity in connection with compelling a public officer or employee to answer questions concerning his or her performance of official duties.If, however, an individual fails to answer questions truthfully where he or she has use or transactional immunity, such immunity does not prevent the fact that he or she answered falsely from being used against the individual if he or she is… [read post]
3 Feb 2010, 10:03 am
United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999). [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 5:45 am
On Wednesday, December 16, 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court granted leave to appeal in Foster v. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 11:35 am
Apfelbaum, 445 US 115; People v. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 4:10 am
" [Motion to appeal denied, 93 N.Y.2d 803.]Howevere, in the event an individual fails to answer questions truthfully where he or she has use or transactional immunity, such immunity does not prevent any false answer the individual might give the investigator from being used against the individual if he or she is subsequently charged with perjury [United States v Apfelbaum, 445 US 115].The Ali decision is posted on the Internet at:[archive.citylaw.org] [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 8:44 am
Finally, Justice Corrigan would hold that these outcomes do not violate the double jeopardy, due process, or equal protection clauses of the United States and Michigan constitutions. [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 7:05 am
The general theme of the dissents was that additional briefing and argument was necessary to consider the implications of the United States Supreme Court decision of Caperton v. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 12:36 pm
United States Issue: Whether the holding in Roe v. [read post]
