Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 2581 - 2600
of 15,319
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Sep 2018, 4:47 am
B/E Aerospace, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 7:18 am
V is for Virtual Currency. [read post]
9 May 2018, 4:35 pm
§ 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague in light of Johnson v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm
(b).) [read post]
19 May 2006, 7:08 am
§ 3624(c), which in its opinion, limited an inmate's placement in a halfway house to the lesser of six months or ten percent of the inmate's sentence. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 1:22 am
Section 1071(b), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia has affirmed the TTAB's dismissal of Swatch, S.A.'s opposition to registration of the mark SWAP in stylized form for "watch faces, watch bands, slide pendants, and beaded watch bands. [read post]
7 Aug 2016, 4:50 pm
Union Neighbors United Inc. v. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 10:50 am
From the Court's syllabus: JUSTICE ALITO, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE SCALIA, and JUSTICE KENNEDY, concluded, in Parts II–C, IV, and V, that the Four-teenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause incorporates the SecondAmendment right recognized in Heller. [read post]
4 Apr 2018, 9:00 pm
On October 31, 2016 A commenced a separate LCIA arbitration against C, mirroring B’s claim against it. [read post]
5 Oct 2022, 4:00 am
Brown, 2022 SCC 18 [2] At common law, automatism is “a state of impaired consciousness, rather than unconsciousness, in which an individual, though capable of action, has no voluntary control over that action” (R. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 6:13 am
From the Court's opinion in United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 2:48 pm
Co. v. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 9:04 am
California v. [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 7:27 pm
What about the much more-common § 841(b)(1)(C) offense? [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 6:57 pm
On 19 December 2013, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its ruling in Corman-Collins SA v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 10:22 am
Section 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires that state and local governments act on an application to site a wireless communication facility “within a reasonable period of time,” and Section 332(c)(7)(B)(v) creates a cause of action for an applicant to challenge any such failure to act. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 9:38 am
Dworkin, 04 C 3317 (N.D. [read post]
26 Apr 2007, 3:16 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 6:00 am
Decided on July 10, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial DepartmentMARK C. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 6:00 am
Decided on July 10, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial DepartmentMARK C. [read post]
