Search for: "People v Miller"
Results 241 - 260
of 1,669
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Oct 2019, 1:28 pm
In 2012, in Miller v. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 8:28 am
In People v. [read post]
15 Oct 2016, 12:38 pm
Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976), and Smith v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 10:29 am
The landowner's actions relying on a valid permit must be so substantial that the municipal action results in serious loss rendering the improvements essentially valueless" (Town of Orangetown v Magee, 88 NY2d at 47-48; see Glacial Aggregates LLC v Town of Yorkshire, 14 NY3d at 136; People v Miller, 304 NY at 109; Matter of RC Enters. v Town of Patterson, 42 AD3d at 544; People ex rel. [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 4:00 am
In Miller v. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 1:56 pm
about the "kill zone" theory in the recent case of People v. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 12:05 pm
That's the headline in today's MetNews about People v. [read post]
18 Aug 2015, 4:00 am
Yesterday in Miller v. [read post]
4 Jul 2024, 7:24 am
& Kelebogile Zvobgo, Historical Violence and Public Attitudes towards Justice: Evidence from the United States Linda J Mann, Advancing Local US Transitional Justice Initiatives: A University Partnership Alongside Descendant Communities Notes from the Field Bretton J McEvoy, ‘Taking Responsibility for the White Collective’: Implicated Subjects and Transformative Justice in the United States Nina Bries Silva, Discovering What Is Already Known: The Afro-Colombian Ancestral… [read post]
4 Feb 2021, 1:17 pm
;Elisa V. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 11:54 am
Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939), held that issues concerning how the Constitution is amended are “political questions” into which the courts may not intervene. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 4:09 pm
It would be difficult for most British people to identify any right that is objectionable (unless, perhaps, they are in favour of the death penalty). [read post]
22 May 2014, 9:01 pm
Earlier this month, in Town of Greece v. [read post]
10 Feb 2010, 11:47 am
The DSM-V website is live as of today. [read post]
16 Aug 2006, 6:14 am
The recent judgments of the House of Lords in Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24, [2006] 1 FLR 1186 point to the urgent need for the courts to set aside the preposterous contention that it is 'substantially uncontestable' that substantial harm to the public would arise if prenuptial agreements were enforceable. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 8:19 pm
Oklahoma Bar Association v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 8:36 am
by: Robert Wagner, intellectual property attorney at Picadio Sneath Miller & Norton, P.C. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 5:16 pm
By Lee DavisUnited States v. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 12:40 pm
Today in Miller v. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
T-13. [2] See Miller Thomson LLP v. [read post]
