Search for: "State v. Mejia"
Results 41 - 60
of 99
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Oct 2015, 1:20 pm
” In United States v. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 7:42 am
Mejia-Luna, No. 07-10472 (4-23-09). [read post]
13 Jan 2010, 7:45 am
Pursuant to Mejia v. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 5:14 pm
" Where these three factors are present, this issue should be addressed by a criminal court as an exception to the mootness doctrine as held in People v Brown, People v Mejia, Matter of Crystal AA and Wagner v Infante. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 7:45 am
The State argued that because of Adoptive Couple v. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 9:21 am
The transcript in Ocasio v. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 5:06 am
United States v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 4:00 am
The Case of the Day, Osorio v. [read post]
9 May 2010, 8:42 am
(Mejia v. [read post]
7 May 2011, 7:25 am
See Quintanilla v. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 5:16 pm
March 25, 2009) (available here) United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 5:16 pm
March 25, 2009) (available here) United States v. [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 1:10 pm
The State of Texas filed an amicus brief in this case at the petition stage. [read post]
8 Sep 2007, 8:46 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Sep 2021, 2:24 pm
Notably, the majority in Hodges recognized that its definition of public injunctive relief is narrower than that adopted by California state appellate courts in Mejia v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 12:00 pm
Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152 (Tex. [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 7:38 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 4:29 am
“Allegations regarding an act of deceit or intent to deceive must be stated with particularity” (Bill Birds, Inc. v Stein Law Firm, P.C., 164 AD3d 635, 637, affd 35 NY3d 173; see Palmieri v Perry, Van Etten, Rozanski & Primavera, LLP, 200 AD3d at 785). [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am
Additionally, petitioner demonstrated that NYCTA had the opportunity to investigate the essential facts in a timely manner, establishing that petitioner's delay did not cause substantial prejudice to NYCTA (see Matter of Mejia v New York City Tr. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am
Additionally, petitioner demonstrated that NYCTA had the opportunity to investigate the essential facts in a timely manner, establishing that petitioner's delay did not cause substantial prejudice to NYCTA (see Matter of Mejia v New York City Tr. [read post]
