Search for: "C Frank" Results 3021 - 3040 of 3,614
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2010, 10:47 pm by JD Hull
Lest anyone worry that writers at this site are developing tolerance for enduring but dumb ideas on hearing and deciding disputes, we will reach out and try here to be frank, forthright, and clear. [read post]
13 May 2010, 11:45 am by AskPat
” Houston Business Journal 31 Mar. 2000: 32A) One such lawyer was George C. [read post]
12 May 2010, 7:29 am
In a Franks challenge, the court should not look beyond the affidavit and what it shows. [read post]
12 May 2010, 7:00 am by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
Senator Frank Lautenberg                        ### [read post]
12 May 2010, 6:22 am
Still applying the AEDPA standard of review, the state court’s findings have support in the record, such that they did not act unreasonably in deciding that he did not state a Franks claim. [read post]
10 May 2010, 3:00 pm by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
Join us as we present: "Getting to Green: Sustainability Initiatives & NYC Development Regulation" Speakers: -Amanda C. [read post]
9 May 2010, 12:41 pm
(Case No. 12.74) The petition was filed by the University of San Francisco’s Frank C. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 5:28 am by Maxwell Kennerly
As Judge Frank Easterbrook commented, Judges read statutes in context, not as isolated clauses. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 1:00 pm by Dan Markel
Dillof (Wayne State University)You Know You Gotta Help Me Out*David Gray (University of Maryland)The War on Drugs Turns 40*Alex Kreit (Thomas Jefferson School of Law)Tailoring Objective Standards to Individuals*Kevin C. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 6:21 am by Kevin Jon Heller
Jones, Burton, Franks, Chaffetz, Latta, Bachmann, Pitts, Akin, Kingston, Gohmert, Conaway, S. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 12:00 am
Hazel (R)hazelc@legis.state.la.us (318)767-6082(318)767-6084 (Fax)Frank A. [read post]
17 Apr 2010, 10:16 pm
The district court's factual determinations for both the Franks hearing and the motion to suppress are not clearly erroneous and its legal conclusions are a proper application of the law. [read post]