Search for: "JONES v. STATE."
Results 3121 - 3140
of 6,828
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2014, 4:55 pm
Jones. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 4:31 pm
In form 1001E it kept the pre-checked box at 6-1 that states that all European Patent Convention (EPC) contract states are designated. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 9:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 9:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 8:14 am
As Deputy AAG, Harbour argued State Oil v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 2:21 pm
<> Jones v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 12:46 am
The Court of Appeal rejected what it considered to be a suggestion by the appellants that there should effectively be a re-hearing of the issue of whether the discrimination was justified given that the right to appeal was on a point of law only under s.13(1), Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, noting the Supreme Court’s guidance on the dividing line between law and fact in R(Jones) v First-tier tribunal [2013] UKSC 19 (citing paragraph 16 of Jones). [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 12:46 am
The Court of Appeal rejected what it considered to be a suggestion by the appellants that there should effectively be a re-hearing of the issue of whether the discrimination was justified given that the right to appeal was on a point of law only under s.13(1), Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, noting the Supreme Court’s guidance on the dividing line between law and fact in R(Jones) v First-tier tribunal [2013] UKSC 19 (citing paragraph 16 of Jones). [read post]
4 Jan 2014, 9:20 am
The Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 11:20 am
The Supreme Court's June 2013 ruling on U.S. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 5:47 pm
See United States v. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 5:14 am
Though Jones v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 10:01 am
App. 1995); Jones v. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:10 am
Normally, a proposal like this get rubber-stamped through a state bar’s review process, so its approval seemed inevitable. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 2:37 pm
And yet, following the DC Circuit's decision in United States v Maynard (which eventually became United States v Jones when it was decided by the Supreme Court), individual jurists and scholars have increasingly embraced a mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment, under which a discrete action (watching someone in public, seeking their phone records via a grand jury subpoena) becomes unconstitutional when government officials engage in that action too… [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 6:18 am
Estate of Karen Parrish v. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 12:41 pm
And in People Express Airlines v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 4:39 am
” At MSNBC, Adam Serwer discusses the influence that Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s concurring opinion in United States v. [read post]
