Filter This View

  • Giles v. California

    Publication Date: 2008-06-25
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2008-06-25
    Court: U.S. Sup. Ct.
    Judge:
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: For petitioner: Marilyn Burkhardt, Los Angeles.
    for defendant: For respondent: Donald De Nicola, California Attorney General's Office, Los Angeles.
    Case Number: 07-6053

    Cite as 08 C.D.O.S. 7838DWAYNE GILES, PETITIONER v. CALIFORNIA No. 07-6053Supreme Court Of The United States On Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of

  • January 13, 2009 | New York Law Journal

    Globe Surgical Supply, appellant v. GEICO Insurance Co., respondent

    Decided Dec. 30, 2008 Before Spolzino, J.P., Florio, Miller, Dickerson, JJ APPEALS by the plaintiff, as limited by its brief, from (1) so much of an order of the Supre

    1 minute read

  • Congregation Rabbinical College of Tartikov, Inc. v. Village of Pomona, 07-CV-6304

    Publication Date: 2013-01-11
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: U. S. District Court, Southern District
    Judge: District Judge Kenneth Karas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Counsel for Plaintiffs: Paul Savad, Esq., Susan E. Cooper, Esq., Laura M. Feigenbaum, Esq., Savad Churgin, Attorneys at Law Nanuet, New York. Counsel for Plaintiffs: Roman P. Storzer, Esq., Robert L. Greene, Esq., Storzer & Greene, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C. Counsel for Plaintiffs: John G. Stepanovich, Esq., Lentz, Stepanovich & Bergethon, P.L.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia.
    for defendant: Counsel for Defendants: Joseph L. Clasen, Esq., William J. Kelleher, III, Esq., Samantha L.H. Cassetta, Esq., Robinson & Cole LLP, New York, NY. Counsel for Defendants: Marci A. Hamilton, Esq., The Law Office of Marci Hamilton, Washington Crossing, Pennsylvania.
    Case Number: 07-CV-6304

    Cite as: Congregation Rabbinical College of Tartikov, Inc. v. Village of Pomona, 07-CV-6304, NYLJ 1202584002615, at *1 (SDNY, Decided January 4, 2013)Dist

  • September 25, 2008 | New Jersey Law Journal

    2008 Ineligible List

    Attorney Ineligibility Order Pursuant to Rule 1:28-2(a) SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY Pursuant to Rule 1:28-2, the Trustees

    1 minute read

  • State v. Timmendequas

    Publication Date: 2001-02-02
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2001-02-01
    Court: N.J. Sup. Ct.
    Judge: Zazzali, J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A-109 September

    ON APPEAL FROM ON CERTIFICATION TO ON PROPORTIONALITY REVIEW OF A DEATH SENTENCE IMPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURT, LAW DIVISION, MERCER COUNTYArgued September 12, 2000On proportionality review of a

  • Dunn v. Colleran

    Publication Date: 2001-04-23
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2001-04-20
    Court: 3rd Cir.
    Judge: Barry, Circuit Judge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 99-1030

    Argued: December 7, 2000OPINION OF THE COURTOur criminal justice system is bottomed on several unwavering principles. One of those principles was recognized long ago by Justice Sutherland when h

  • Amelco Electric v. City of Thousand Oaks

    Publication Date: 2002-02-05
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2002-02-04
    Court: Cal.Sup.Ct.
    Judge: BROWN, J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: No. S091069

    The full case caption appears at the end of this opinion. In this case we determine whether the abandonment theory of liability applies against a public agency, and whether p

  • James William Mcbride v. Superintendent, Sci Houtzdale

    Publication Date: 2012-08-06
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2012-08-01
    Court: 3rd Cir.
    Judge: Jordan, Circuit Judge.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 11-2480

    PRECEDENTIALArgued March 26, 2012Before: FUENTES, SMITH, and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.OPINION OF THE COURTJames McBride appeals an order of the United States District Court for the Eas

  • September 28, 2009 | New Jersey Law Journal

    2009 Ineligible List

    Attorney Ineligibility Order Pursuant to Rule 1:28-2(a) SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY Pursuant to Rule 1:28-2, the Trustees of the New Jersey Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection (Fund

    1 minute read

  • Anilao v. Spota, 10-CV-00032 (JFB) (WDW)

    Publication Date: 2011-04-07
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. District Court, Eastern District
    Judge: District Judge Joseph F. Bianco
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Plaintiffs are represented by James Druker of Kase & Druker, Esqs., Garden City, NY. Plaintiff Vinluan is also represented by Oscar Michelen of Cuomo LLC, South, Mineola, NY.
    for defendant: The County defendants are represented by Brian C. Mitchell, Suffolk County Department of Law, County Attorney, Hauppauge, NY. The Sentosa defendants are represented by Sarah C. Lichtenstein of Abrams, Fensterman, Fensterman, Flowers, Greenberg & Eisman, Lake Success, NY.
    Case Number: 10-CV-00032 (JFB) (WDW)

    Cite as: Anilao v. Spota, 10-CV-00032 (JFB) (WDW), NYLJ 1202489219823, at *1 (EDNY, Decided March 31, 2011)District Judge Joseph F. Biancop class="decided"