Search for: "People v. Quick" Results 2341 - 2360 of 2,541
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2023, 11:14 am by Kevin LaCroix
Charles V, Ferdinand and Isabella’s grandson, added a Renaissance place to the center of the compound [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 5:01 am by Tia Sewell
When the Biden administration takes office on Jan. 20, one place that will likely see quick and decisive change is the U.S. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 4:57 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Can make sense in individual cases even with good fair use defenses, but Rothman is concerned that courts incorporate these risk averse customs into their legal analysis—example from Ringgold v. [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 11:01 am by Shalev Roisman
” Prakash uses the term broadly to include any form of interpretation that allows for “informal constitutional change” outside the Article V amendment process (see pp. 112-13, 130). [read post]
11 Dec 2020, 4:20 am by Chris Seaton
” Then pay the fine and removal fee super quick so your business isn’t significantly impacted. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 1:20 am by Webmaster
Google: Judge Appoints a Damages Expert  In the Oracle v. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 10:01 am by Daphne Keller
The Israeli Supreme Court recently rejected a challenge to Israel’s version of this system, in a case called Adalah v. [read post]
22 May 2023, 5:16 am by Roger Parloff
Although at least 15 people have been sentenced for seditious conspiracy since the U.S. [read post]
5 Feb 2007, 7:43 am
The book is a quick read, it should be needless to say.I have read a couple of Posner's previous books very thoroughly, and created relatively long outlines of questions about them, in preparation for taping one hour televisions interviews with him about the books. [read post]
1 Jun 2007, 7:30 pm
On July 2, 1976, in deciding the case of Gregg v Georgia, the Supreme Court legalised capital punishment after a decade-long moratorium on executions. [read post]
2 Oct 2022, 5:12 pm by Aaron Moss
Ironically, that’s the one defense that, per the Supreme Court’s recent pronouncement in Google v. [read post]