Search for: "Education v. M. et al" Results 281 - 300 of 435
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Jan 2012, 8:11 am by Lyle Denniston
The 6-2 decision (with Justice Elena Kagan not taking part) came in the case of Golan, et al., v. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 5:40 am by Chris Castle
  I have to assume that they each actually read the draft text before putting their name to a criticism, even when in the company of luminaries like Lessig et al. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 2:13 pm by Pace Law School Library
L. 807-811 (2011).Thomas, Seth M., et al. 2009-2010 environmental law survey. 44 Ind. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 1:20 am by Webmaster
 Thus, Judge Sam Sparks felt the need to educate counsel in this matter when they could not agree on the scope of a third party subpoena: The utterly predictable result is shown below: It is a shame that so many lawyers believe that practicing law means unlearning everything we were taught in kindergarten. ***   Oracle v. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 8:59 pm by Schachtman
” Michele Carbone et al., “Modern Criteria to Establish Human Cancer Etiology,” 64 Cancer Res. 5518, 5522 (2004).) [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 9:39 am
This is the fourth in a series of blog entries monitoring the proposed elimination of redevelopment agencies. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 9:39 am
This is the fourth in a series of blog entries monitoring the proposed elimination of redevelopment agencies. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 3:12 am by New Books Script
48 new acquisitions for the Osgoode Hall Law School Library, including 37 from 2011: GT 2460 B57 2011 Birth rites and rights / edited by Fatemeh Ebtehaj … [et al.]. [read post]
30 Sep 2011, 6:28 am by judith
Over the past couple of years, there has been a great deal of discussion — particularly in relation to the Durham Statement [1] — about technical standards and preservation issues for law reviews that publish openly and exclusively online. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 10:27 am by Badrinath Srinivasan
In particular, because of the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]