Search for: "JOHNSON v. SHORT" Results 241 - 260 of 1,142
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jun 2020, 11:30 pm by Schachtman
Fortunately, in this era of electronic dockets, finding the actual Rule 702 motion is not very difficult, and we can inspect the challenge to see whether it was dodged or given short shrift. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Campaign Funds for Judges Warp Criminal Justice, Study Finds New York Times – Adam Liptak | Published: 6/1/2020 In Gideon v. [read post]
24 May 2020, 4:06 pm by INFORRM
The short Easter legal term has ended on Friday 22 May 2020 and the Trinity term starts on Tuesday 2 June 2020. [read post]
22 May 2020, 10:10 am by Simmons Hanly Conroy
Talc Defendants Rely on ‘Mucking Up’ the Findings: A typical defense seen in talc lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson (J&J), the makers of Johnson’s Baby Powder®, is to discredit the asbestos testing methods — and thus the findings — used by medical-expert witnesses to prove the presence of asbestos in talc. [read post]
18 May 2020, 12:49 pm by Renee Knake
Headlines like “Then Comes the Marriage Question” and “Elena Kagan v. [read post]
30 Mar 2020, 8:42 am by Amy Howe
In a short statement joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sotomayor explained that Patrick’s case involved the same question on which she had previously dissented from the denial of review: whether defendants sentenced under mandatory sentencing guidelines can rely on the court’s 2015 decision in Johnson v. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 3:52 am by Edith Roberts
Kit Johnson has this blog’s opinion analysis. [read post]
17 Mar 2020, 1:32 pm by Noble McIntyre
NEUTROGENA® and AVEENO® Aerosol Sunscreen Products have been recalled by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. due to the presence of benzene. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Johnson suggested that nuclear war might result if Barry Goldwater was elected president. [read post]
21 Feb 2020, 9:04 am by David Post
"** ** The court's holding here regarding the level of scrutiny to be applied in this case appears to be in conflict with two other decisions (Johnson v. [read post]