Search for: "AMES v. STRAIN"
Results 181 - 200
of 393
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Apr 2015, 11:52 pm
A rock and a hard place Ms Nzolameso announced: “I am very happy with today’s outcome and delighted to be reunited with my children, who I never envisaged would be taken away from me”. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 4:54 pm
As pleased as I am that the SCA re-interpreted Rule 62(7) in this way, I think it does strain the language of the rule to give it this interpretation. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 7:18 pm
Grant v. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 6:33 pm
What chance is there that he will "hold the balance, nice, clear and true" (Caperton v. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 4:00 am
” Canada (Attorney General) v. [read post]
8 Feb 2015, 2:38 pm
In one strained passage, however, Greenland uses a disjunction to juxtapose null hypothesis testing with proof beyond a reasonable doubt[10]. [read post]
8 Feb 2015, 2:30 pm
In one strained passage, however, Greenland uses a disjunction to juxtapose null hypothesis testing with proof beyond a reasonable doubt[10]. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 1:52 pm
” (citation omitted)); In re Am. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 9:06 am
Direct Marketing Association v. [read post]
24 Nov 2014, 5:32 am
Decker v. [read post]
23 Nov 2014, 12:00 am
[xiii] Yates v. [read post]
15 Nov 2014, 12:00 am
Consider the case of King v. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 4:23 pm
I’ll say no more about that case now because I am involved in it and it is ongoing. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 10:42 am
You can see the e-mails here, and the judge’s decision here; I also quote the judge’s decision below: State v. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 10:54 pm
V, 1292b] These insights apply, I believe, with equal force to the constitution of a law for corporate codes. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:48 am
People v. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 8:19 pm
P., V. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 10:50 am
Yesterday, in U.S. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2014, 9:03 am
Chief Justice Rehnquist no doubt spoke for most judges and lawyers in expressing his discomfort with the notion that courts would have to actually look at science (rather than qualifications, demeanor, and credibility)[17]: “I defer to no one in my confidence in federal judges; but I am at a loss to know what is meant when it is said that the scientific status of a theory depends on its ‘falsifiability’, and I suspect some of them will be, too. [read post]
25 Jul 2014, 5:55 am
See, e.g., People v. [read post]
