Search for: "C. J. Perez" Results 81 - 100 of 123
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Apr 2012, 9:09 am by Zachary Spilman
Perez, 66 M.J. 164, 165 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (Stucky, J. concurring) (“A convening authority is not required to correct legal errors … But where he does so, his action must be guided by the same rules applicable to appellate authorities”); United States v. [read post]
28 Jan 2023, 7:32 am
 Pix Credit hereESG, has been driven by the private sector and intensely debated in the context of privately ordered responsible business conduct standards, and formed part of a rich debates among market actors and public international organizations about the role and nature of so-called non-financial siclosure in genmeral, and sustainability and climate related factors in decision making. [read post]
9 May 2018, 9:40 am by John Elwood
United States, 17-1366, would justify readers in feeling a bit of déjà vu all over again. [read post]
25 Feb 2013, 6:37 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
§ 16(a)(1)(C) (2006) (FAA provision permitting appeals of orders denying application to compel arbitration); CMH Homes v. [read post]
25 Feb 2013, 6:37 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
§ 16(a)(1)(C) (2006) (FAA provision permitting appeals of orders denying application to compel arbitration); CMH Homes v. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
  Quite the contrary, Third Restatement’s drafters criticized comment j’s presumption language as “unfortunate” and stated that it shouldn’t be followed. [read post]
1 Apr 2021, 8:33 am by Eugene Volokh
For example: Student C truthfully reports on social media that she was sexually assaulted by her softball coach. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, a case dealing with the impact of copyright’s first sale doctrine — 17 USC § 109(a) — on the Copyright Act’s importation prohibition — 17 USC § 602(a)(1). [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, a case dealing with the impact of copyright’s first sale doctrine — 17 USC § 109(a) — on the Copyright Act’s importation prohibition — 17 USC § 602(a)(1). [read post]