Search for: "People v. Haven"
Results 2561 - 2580
of 2,780
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jul 2008, 5:54 am
We cannot wait until the people we are associating with "alleviate[e] the suspicion" from us. [read post]
16 Jul 2008, 10:11 am
People v. [read post]
15 Jul 2008, 6:14 pm
Simmons v. [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 11:16 pm
Barrett v LB Southwark [2008] EWHC 1568 (Comm) was an appeal of a dismissed application for permission to make a s.204 appeal out of time on an intentional homelessness decision upheld at s.202 review. [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 7:18 pm
Last update of the week today, which means that people who haven't stopped reading this blog during Kevin's vacation - or those who have subscribed to the LexBlogosphere RSS feed - will ring in the weekend with an increased awareness of where the legal community stands today. [read post]
10 Jul 2008, 5:31 pm
Some people get the application of the learned intermediary rule mixed up with whether the defendant actually wins or not. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 8:09 pm
Read the unpublished decision at PEOPLE v. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 5:15 am
Obviously, if an individual was in the World Trade Center in 9-11, that pretty obviously would meet any description, but there haven’t been a lot of cases since. [read post]
5 Jul 2008, 1:13 am
An Aug. 24, 1999, Washington Post report quotes McCain: "But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. [read post]
1 Jul 2008, 3:06 pm
Listen to Dependent Relief. [read post]
1 Jul 2008, 2:33 pm
Or if they do live in NY, I've haven't seen them. [read post]
30 Jun 2008, 2:10 pm
Lindor's legal defense in UMG v. [read post]
30 Jun 2008, 10:43 am
In our correspondence, I used a phrase that seemed odd, on reflection, just after the decision in D.C. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 7:12 pm
And, you know, in our practice, we just typically haven't seen a lot of people exercising these entitlements, but that's only because it's a new phenomenon. [read post]
30 May 2008, 3:32 pm
Supreme Court prohibited the execution of the mentally retarded in Atkins v. [read post]
28 May 2008, 4:26 pm
These two decisions affirm what many people thought was already the law, especially in the CBOCS West case, so employees haven't really gained any ground. [read post]
28 May 2008, 8:26 am
These two decisions affirm what many people thought was already the law, especially in the CBOCS West case, so employees haven’t really gained any ground. [read post]
22 May 2008, 11:08 pm
BOTELHO, Petitioners v. [read post]
18 May 2008, 6:04 am
State v. [read post]
17 May 2008, 4:06 pm
Supreme Court in 1964 in McLaughlin v. [read post]
