Search for: "E. Hobbs" Results 221 - 240 of 256
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Feb 2010, 3:34 pm by Mike
"   These days, there aren't many classic Hobbs Act extortion cases. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 1:30 pm by Chris Jaglowitz
    Records Retention: Going Paperless through E-Archives -- Paper is so passé! [read post]
7 Feb 2010, 5:41 am by Lawrence Solum
Hobbes, Rousseau, and Locke all have distinctive theories of the social contract, but Locke’s version has been especially salient—both to libertarian theory and American constitutionalism. [read post]
14 Nov 2009, 6:05 pm by Joel Jacobsen
  [E]veryone in the area seemed convinced it was a message. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 11:30 am
The announcement was held at the East Harlem site for one of the housing developments, Hobbs Court, where the Mayor was joined by Council Member Melissa Mark-Viverito, Department of Housing and Preservation and Development Commissioner Rafael E. [read post]
24 Jul 2009, 1:02 am
In the words of Mr Hobbs QC, the KitchenAid was‘distinctive with relatively little scope for deviation from the paradigm form. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 3:09 pm
It's been a few days since Geoffrey Hobbs QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, handed down his decision in Whirlpool v Kenwood. [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 1:49 am
[E]veryone I have met from an atheist perspective believes in certain principles, such as equal worth of all humans, equal treatment of all humans, and autonomy. [read post]
18 Jun 2008, 3:28 am
UPDATE: Bill Hobbs comments: "Patterico catches the Associated Press doing what the AP threatened to sue bloggers for doing. . . . [read post]
3 Jun 2008, 3:27 am
Here are the facts:Following a Grand Jury Indictment for extortion in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. [read post]
27 May 2008, 9:50 am
To view these cases distributed by Findlaw.com you must first sign in to Findlaw.com. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 9:47 am
Gray, No. 05-4482, 06-3086, 06-3209 Defendants' convictions for various offenses convictions, which stemmed from their alleged schemes to procure government contracts for corporate clients and financial gains for themselves by illicitly providing money and gifts to public officials in exchange for political influence in the bid for municipal contracts, are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court did not err in concluding that various purported imperfections did not… [read post]