Search for: "PEOPLE v. JAMES" Results 1981 - 2000 of 3,745
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 May 2014, 11:24 am
 Until now most people - including a number of leading copyright academics - would have easily opted for 'true'. [read post]
12 Jul 2022, 2:29 am by Florian Mueller
Match Group has been named as a defendant in litigation relating to its billing and subscription practices filed by multiple California District Attorneys relating to such practices, People of State of California v. [read post]
29 Jan 2021, 10:29 am by Rebecca Tushnet
” Similarly in architecture there is quotation: Konstantin Melnikov, Rusakov Club; quoted in James Stirling, Leicester Engineering Building. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 4:00 am by Harry Litman
People may forget that Clinton was not legally compelled to testify. [read post]
14 May 2008, 1:01 pm
For the last two years, SCHR has represented a class of people on the registry in Whitaker v. [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 8:00 am by Guest Blogger
  Until relatively recently, Article V and the hurdles it presented to formal constitutional amendment was seen as a feature rather than a bug, especially if one credited the constitutional theories of esteemed scholars like David Strauss or Bruce Ackerman. [read post]
30 May 2014, 6:31 am by John Elwood
  The Court also denied cert. in a dozen Confrontation Clause cases it relisted last week, all of which we’ll list here in an effort to waste even more electrons (and time) than usual: James v. [read post]
11 Jul 2010, 2:43 am by INFORRM
In Abdullah Ahmadi v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd Rothman J ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff US$7,500 damages in respect of an allegation that he was a people smuggler. [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 6:54 am by Rachel Sachs
Justice Kagan has been named to TIME’s 2013 list of its one hundred most influential people in the world. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 5:19 am by Alfred Brophy
  For instance, I would have expected more James Baldwin. [read post]
27 Mar 2022, 4:50 pm by INFORRM
Internet and Social Media The Government has added two new duties to the proposed Online Safety Bill  that are aimed at protecting people against anonymous online abuse. [read post]