Search for: "State v. Miser"
Results 201 - 220
of 320
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jan 2012, 11:47 am
The state of these continuing congregations – often by their own admission – can be described as at best poorly prepared to maintain and operate large church properties, or at worst, teetering on the edge of being non-viable. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 3:00 am
If there's anything worse than failing to specify standards for the alternative valuation, it's providing no alternative, as when the buy-sell mandates use of the stale fixed price, which brings us to this week's featured case, DeMatteo v. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 7:49 pm
* State v. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 10:19 am
In SEC v. [read post]
26 Dec 2011, 8:20 am
In the meantime, what are the lessons for prosecutors, judges, and even defense counsel, all of whom failed miserably at their jobs 25 years ago? [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 4:30 am
These are some of the things I've been tweeting about today: "Bradley Manning’s Defense Attorney Looks to Blame Military for Leaks" reports @KimZetter for @wired http://pjblack.me/vWsFIt good call i think: "Tom Hooper rejects 3D for Les Miserables movie" http://pjblack.me/uot7gV i doubt mitt romney would really want this enforsement: "Dan Quayle to Endorse Mitt Romney" Image by Dave Delay via Flickr … [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 3:40 am
" This morning the Court of Justice gave its ruling in Joined Cases C 446/09 Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Industrial Company Ltd, Far East Sourcing Ltd, Röhlig Hong Kong Ltd, Röhlig Belgium NV and Nokia Corporation and and C 495/09 Nokia Corporation v Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Revenue and Customs, International Trademark Association intervening. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 3:45 am
Saharsky, who argued in support of state prosecutors in the case. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 6:07 am
But on second thoughts, now you know you have indeed been exposed to asbestos such that you might develop mesothelioma – and you have seen colleagues die a miserable death from that disease. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 6:07 am
But on second thoughts, now you know you have indeed been exposed to asbestos such that you might develop mesothelioma – and you have seen colleagues die a miserable death from that disease. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 1:42 am
v=43f2bBjGi_8 Now, that’s quite a quirky repertory, and it stands in favorable comparison to Tom’s: the periodic table, plagiarism, pollution, the new math, the Vatican II conference, and of course the silent letter ‘e’. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 5:57 pm
Concepcion and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 6:26 am
But on second thoughts, now you know you have indeed been exposed to asbestos such that you might develop mesothelioma – and you have seen colleagues die a miserable death from that disease. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 8:17 am
A few of my prior postings on the subject as we put this issue to bed for awhile: Kaye v. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 8:50 pm
" Never having been particularly strong in my criminal law course, I'm a little shaky on the notion of "treason," but I gather it's got something to do with a direct offense against the state--somehow I hear an echo of Henry V repeating "why, so dist thou," as he sends his former friends away to meet their doom ("Get you therefore hence,/ Poor miserable wretches, to your death"), I don't know about you, but… [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 7:14 am
McCourt’s miserable proposal, the Commissioner’s decision comes as no surprise: I cannot approve the Proposed Transaction. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 3:01 am
Not really.But in United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 2:39 am
This is a good example: how could a court find that this case, which clearly involves the dignity and family life of a man whose life is difficult and miserable, not engage the protection of human rights law? [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 2:36 pm
The following are the most important orders given by the Justices Sudershan Reddy and Surinder Singh Nijjar of the Supreme Court in the case of Nandini Sundar v State of Chattisgarh (2011):1. [read post]
30 Jun 2011, 5:00 am
In Tews v. [read post]
