Search for: "Degree v. United States"
Results 2461 - 2480
of 6,520
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2017, 2:16 pm
Although the medical value of marijuana has been proven, marijuana is considered a Schedule I drug, which include hallucinogens and narcotics that are frequently abused and have no acceptable medical value for treatment in the United States. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 3:00 am
For instance, the Supreme Court held in U.S. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 3:34 pm
Perhaps best exemplified by Winter v. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 12:06 pm
Animal Legal Defense Fund v. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 1:34 pm
" That led the court to a consideration of prior English case law as well of that of other EPC member states. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 11:18 am
That depends, to a large degree, on President Donald Trump. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 7:59 am
" That led the court to a consideration of prior English case law as well of that of other EPC member states. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 1:55 pm
(Najim v London Borough of Enfield [2015] EWCA Civ 319; [2015] HLR 19) (…) The proper approach to be derived from such authorities, and Tranckle (R v Exeter City Council, ex p. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 10:32 am
Having only an undergraduate degree, and attending medical school at the time of submission, Ms. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 8:50 am
DBA Jimmy John’s v. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 2:24 am
U.S. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 1:01 am
Robert Jackson, born in 1892, served as United States Solicitor General (1938-1940), United States Attorney General (1940–1941) and an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1941–1954). [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 4:35 pm
In Samira Achbita v. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 11:14 am
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2017, 8:25 am
An offense under subsection (a) is a third-degree felony. [read post]
7 Jul 2017, 6:50 am
This issue was resolved by the United States Supreme Court in 1979 in the noteworthy case of William Orr v. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 4:02 pm
After long proceedings at national level, a preliminary ruling by the CJEU on 16 December 2008 (Case C-73/07), and after the Court of Human Rights Chamber judgment of 21 July 2015, the Grand Chamber on 27 June 2017 finally found no violation of the right to freedom of expression and information in Satakunnan Markkinapörssi Oy and Satamedia Oy v. [read post]
4 Jul 2017, 7:49 am
In fact, in Abramski v. [read post]
3 Jul 2017, 2:01 pm
State v. [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 9:09 pm
” United States v. [read post]
