Search for: "People v. Smith (1988)" Results 181 - 200 of 222
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2012, 8:55 pm by Lawrence Solum
For example, the intention behind the equal protection clause might be formulated at a relatively high level of generality--leading to the conclusion that segregation is unconstitutional--or at a very particular level--in which case the fact that the Reconstruction Congress segregated the District of Columbia schools might be thought to support the "separate but equal" principle of Plessy v. [read post]
7 May 2023, 6:00 am by Lawrence Solum
For example, the intention behind the equal protection clause might be formulated at a relatively high level of generality--leading to the conclusion that segregation is unconstitutional--or at a very particular level--in which case the fact that the Reconstruction Congress segregated the District of Columbia schools might be thought to support the "separate but equal" principle of Plessy v. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:34 am by Ben
  One of the more incredible allegations about Prenda Law, the copyright-trolling operation that sued people for downloading movies online, was that the lawyers behind Prenda and its associated companies might have created and uploaded some of the porn, simply as a way of catching more offenders. [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 2:07 pm
For example, the intention behind the equal protection clause might be formulated at a relatively high level of generality--leading to the conclusion that segregation is unconstitutional--or at a very particular level--in which case the fact that the Reconstruction Congress segregated the District of Columbia schools might be thought to support the "separate but equal" principle of Plessy v. [read post]
16 Mar 2008, 10:41 am
For example, the intention behind the equal protection clause might be formulated at a relatively high level of generality--leading to the conclusion that segregation is unconstitutional--or at a very particular level--in which case the fact that the Reconstruction Congress segregated the District of Columbia schools might be thought to support the "separate but equal" principle of Plessy v. [read post]
3 May 2021, 3:00 pm by Eugene Volokh
The passage, from which the student quoted part of the last sentence, reads: On September 2, 1988, defendant, Bennie Eugene Bridges, attended a birthday party with some fifty to sixty young people for sixteen-year-old Cheryl Smith in the basement of her home in Roebling, New Jersey. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 2:40 pm by Jon McLaughlin
Only in 1983 did the General Assembly amend Section 401(a) to add the 90-days-before-filing alternative (see Section 401(a), Supplement to Historical and Practice Notes, Ill.Ann.Stat. ch. 40, ¶ 401 (Smith-Hurd 1985 pocket part)). [read post]
2 Nov 2017, 3:00 am by INFORRM
  Evidence that people agree with you because they have liked the post or added a supporting comment is not evidence of the truth of the allegations, merely evidence of the harm you have caused the subject’s reputation. [read post]
25 Jul 2008, 7:04 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: CAFC affirms validity and enforceability of Eisai’s compound patent on Aciphex; elucidates current standard for obviousness of chemical composition of matter patents: Eisai v Reddy’s Lab’s and Teva Pharma: (Orange Book Blog), (Patent Docs), (Patent Prospector), (IP Law360), (Hal Wegner), (Patent Baristas),… [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 10:50 am
I’ve recently been blogging about my new article, The Inherent-Powers Corollary: Judicial Non-Delegation and Federal Common Law, which I’ve posted to SSRN. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 4:34 am
Some people also develop heel spurs, bony growths in the heel that cause chronic or long-lasting foot pain. [read post]
11 Oct 2010, 9:57 pm
Some people also develop heel spurs, bony growths in the heel that cause chronic or long-lasting foot pain. [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 6:31 pm
Smith emphasized his choice of a running royalty over a lump-sum payment. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 1:32 am
However, in Eldred v Ashcroft“The First Amendment securely protects the freedom to make – or decline to make – one’s own speech; it bears less heavily when speakers assert the right to make other people’s speeches. [read post]