Search for: "Matter of M. M. v A. A."
Results 281 - 300
of 15,505
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Feb 2024, 6:00 am
Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, New York (Jason M. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 3:44 pm
According to the USSC: 9% had little or no prior criminal history (Criminal History Category I); 7% were CHC II; 8% were CHC III; 2% were CHC IV; 5% were CHC V; 9% were CHC VI. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 5:52 am
From Weaver v. [read post]
11 Feb 2024, 10:27 pm
I remain persuaded by Justice Scalia's dissent in Morrison v. [read post]
11 Feb 2024, 5:15 pm
The big news, needless to say, was the decision in USA v. [read post]
Don’t Judge a Range by its Cover: Federal Circuit Sides with Patentee on Written Description Support
11 Feb 2024, 9:43 am
RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2024, 7:16 am
I’m worried about this too. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 5:00 pm
Putin ("President Vladimir V. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 11:55 am
Burke, I’m hoping that you will be in a different situation, not on a phone. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 11:37 am
[This is the second installment in a series about the oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 6:20 am
I’m not just talking about Joe Six-Pack here. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 5:00 am
In the case of Dominiak v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 12:51 pm
Substance matters, not form, when defining income. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 1:34 pm
I understand Part II, but I'm seriously thinking deeply about Part III. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 3:36 pm
As I explained in one of my earlier posts, several or all of the Justices might be inclined to decide the case on some ground that doesn’t require the Court to decide whether Donald Trump is eligible to be President, if such an “off-ramp” solution is legally available. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 2:54 pm
An excerpt from today's Appellate Court of Connecticut decision in Ambrose v. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 8:40 am
Pinto v. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 5:21 pm
Class V. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 4:22 pm
Since Mrs Justice Collins Rice handed down judgment in Fox v Blake [2024] EWHC 146 (KB) there has been a lot of online discussion about the case. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 8:15 am
It is for this reason that Smith v. [read post]