Search for: "Matter of Doe v Kelly" Results 261 - 280 of 640
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Nov 2009, 2:52 pm
" "[I]f a defendant intended ... to sexually assault a person, it does not matter that the intended victim was fictional or did not actually exist," Judge James Casebolt wrote. ..Source.. ==================================== Colorado Court of Appeals -- November 12, 2009 No. 07CA2393. [read post]
14 Jul 2012, 3:00 am
Rather, this matter additionally hinges upon the functional relationship between respondents and the public benefit corporation known as ECMCC. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 7:09 am
As always, the IPKat is here to bring you a quick summary -- the 173rd edition of Never Too Late (for week ending 10th December 2017).Why is it so difficult to the make the case against counterfeiting (or does it just seem so)? [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 12:49 pm by Giles Peaker
Some of the back history of this case was in R (Kelly, Mehari and JI) v Birmingham City Council [2009] EWHC 3240 (Admin) (our note) and R (Khazai, Ebrahim, Azizi and Mirghani) v Birmingham City Council [2010] EWHC 2576 (Admin) (our note), in both of which Birmingham faced substantial criticism of their homeless procedures and gatekeeping. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:05 pm
Indeed, an individual who has been found guilty of criminal conduct cannot be found not guilty of the same offense[s] in a subsequent administrative disciplinary action [see Kelly v Levin, 440 NYS2d 424]. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 7:24 pm by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento
Wikipedia does not accept edits via hand-held devices or tablets, so laptops are crucial (free WiFi will be available). [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 6:59 am
Warley, Schechter Poultry v. [read post]
11 May 2020, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed their convictions.Writing for the Court in Kelly v. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
At the same time, courts recognize that every disciplinary situation is different and are pre-disposed to accord “much deference” to the employer’s determination regarding the penalty to be imposed [Ahsaf v Nyquist, 37 NY2d 182], especially with respect to quasi-military organizations such as a police department or a similar law enforcement agency [Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32].In Gradel v Sullivan Co. [read post]