Search for: "People v. Fews" Results 281 - 300 of 14,806
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Apr 2009, 10:48 am
At Monday's oral argument in Nijhawan v. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 11:39 am by Lyle Denniston
  If that change shuts out the legislature, more  or less entirely, that could be a constitutional problem, or so it appeared during the argument in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
14 Oct 2007, 7:57 am
We've been asked two questions repeatedly since the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
12 Aug 2007, 7:39 am
Why do people need medical attention when they sue as a class that they do not need when the very same people sue individually? [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 5:22 am
It seems to me that many people would consider the result in Kernott to be unfair (Nearly Legal calls it "a somewhat harsh outcome", and it certainly raised a few media eyebrows (see e.g. here)), and if it is then should not the law be changed? [read post]
5 May 2014, 1:14 pm by Francisco Macías
On May 3, 1954,the Supreme Court issued its decision on Hernández v. [read post]
20 Dec 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Joseph FishkinMost writers and scholars (perhaps most people in general?) [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 10:04 am by Jon
With few exceptions, bad Supreme Court precedents seem to move government in only one direction — toward greater power over people — despite the lack of authority for that in the Constitution as originally meant and understood. [read post]
16 Jul 2008, 5:00 am
Until a few years ago my answer was no, because I always thought the title sounded silly and manipulative. [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 10:06 am by Molly Wilson
  Even legal case books contain examples; who can forget the famous tort case, Eckert v. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 12:49 am
A few years ago it became possible for photo libraries to sniff the Internet for unlicensed copies of their photographs. [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 5:29 am by Chris Seaton
Few have issues with this or are calling foul over a lack of due process. [read post]