Search for: "State v. Levell" Results 201 - 220 of 29,508
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Apr 2024, 2:07 pm by Larry
Such is the case in Ninestar Corporation et al. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:19 am
 The short summary I prepared fleshes out the themes I hope to cover: Regulatory governance is well within a process of transformation from a managerial system deeply embedded in the classical model of the rule-of-law state grounded in positive (or customary) law pronounced by an authoritative body clothed in the legislative power, to the world of the panopticon and the disciplines. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 1:00 am by INFORRM
The African Court on Human and Peoples’ RightsNoudehouenou v. [read post]
4 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by Joseph Margulies
I was also counsel—though not lead counsel—in United States v. [read post]
4 Apr 2024, 3:22 am by Frank Cranmer
The impugned decrees stated that, where animals were slaughtered in accordance with special methods required for religious rites, the stunning method applied would be reversible and non-lethal. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 10:30 pm by Jesse Peters
  The ICJ Order in South Africa v Israel On 26 January 2024, the ICJ delivered its landmark Order indicating provisional measures in South Africa v Israel. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Indeed, as one federal court recently stated, “the ‘crypto’ nomenclature may be of recent vintage, but the challenged transactions fall comfortably within the framework that courts have used to identify securities for nearly eighty years. [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 10:30 pm by Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon
Yet, the EU standard for legal anonymisation is still hotly debated, as illustrated by the recent case of SRB v EDPS now under appeal before the Court of Justice. [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
” ENDNOTE [1] See Order, Lujan Claimants v. [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 11:09 am by Neil H. Buchanan
  Antonin Scalia had an acid tongue ("pure applesauce," "jiggery-pokery"), and he did his share of trolling as well (once responding to a law student's question about Bush v. [read post]
At that time, the primary insurer did not consider the company’s communication to be a claim and stated it needed additional information. [read post]