Search for: "Paul C. May" Results 61 - 80 of 2,951
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Oct 2023, 4:04 am by Seán Binder
Paul Dallison reports for POLITICO. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 9:55 am by Kluwer Patent blogger
It may also be because plaintiffs are accustomed to the German bifurcated system, where plaintiffs have a procedural advantage. [read post]
21 Oct 2023, 9:55 pm by Cari Rincker
  [1] Paul Halsall, Ancient History Sourcebook: A Collection of Contracts from Mesopotamia, c. 2300 – 428 BCE, Fordham Univ. [read post]
20 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm by Korinne Dunn
In a forthcoming article for the Michigan Law Review, Michael C. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 1:28 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
There was no privity requirement as long as the plaintiffs had an interest in the money and proof that the defendant “may” have acquired a benefit from an unfair practice. [read post]
8 Oct 2023, 9:56 am by Gene Takagi
Pesce & Neal Paul Donnelly, Kirkland & Ellis) Steering the Ship Through Choppy Waters: Nonprofit Board Duties During the COVID-19 Pandemic (Robert L. [read post]
3 Oct 2023, 10:10 am by Dave Maass
EFF Special Advisor Paul Tepper and EFF intern Michael Rubio contributed research to this report. [read post]
28 Sep 2023, 9:02 pm by Josephine A. Phillips
EDITOR’S CHOICE In an essay in The Regulatory Review, Paul C. [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 7:21 pm by Bill Marler
   An extraordinary non-O157 outbreak occurred in Germany beginning in May 2011. [read post]
18 Sep 2023, 7:11 pm by admin
  In other words, non-credible associations may support IARC’s conclusions of causality. [read post]
11 Sep 2023, 2:31 am by Seán Binder
Paul Kane reports for the Washington Post. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 9:05 pm by Sri Medicherla
Ehrman, a law professor at the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law and Robin Kundis Craig, the Robert C. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 8:25 pm by Sri Medicherla
Ehrman, a law professor at the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law and Robin Kundis Craig, the Robert C. [read post]
27 Aug 2023, 3:56 pm by Andrew Warren
A judge should probe such facts before making a decision on removal.[12] Importantly, the Supreme Court has explained that the evidentiary standard for the defendant may be higher in criminal cases of removal “because of the more compelling state interest in conducting criminal trials in the state court. [read post]