Search for: "Bear v. State"
Results 3141 - 3160
of 14,844
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Oct 2020, 7:05 am
Though in Moncrieffe v. [read post]
7 Aug 2014, 6:51 am
Potts v. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 1:35 pm
Gayet, 92 N.J. 149, 155 (1983) (quoting State v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 12:30 pm
Only one state constitutional provision addressing the right to bear arms contains an exception for felons. [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 5:42 am
Vacha v. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 4:21 pm
On 4 November 2019 Warby J gave judgment in the case of Lord Sheikh v Associated Newspapers [2019] EWHC 2947 (QB) finding that a MailOnline article made a defamatory allegation against the the claimant, a Conservative Member of the House of Lords. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 4:04 pm
And because the state called another analyst to testify, the jury never learned the reason the original one was gone - a fact that may have had a significant bearing on the original analyst's credibility. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 2:59 pm
See Enmund v. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 10:26 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Jun 2021, 11:12 am
See United States v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 8:10 pm
Heller and McDonald v. [read post]
25 Jun 2009, 1:48 pm
See SCOTUSBlog coverage here and opinion here.I think CAAF will need to re-look at the rule in United States v. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 7:01 am
Some people have unkindly suggested that the harmonised IP laws of the European Union bear the same relationship to real law as the paintings of Salvador Dalí occupy with regard to reality. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 11:26 am
The court in Aviva v. [read post]
13 Dec 2015, 7:52 am
The gun owners argued the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is applicable to the states by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment as recognized by the Supreme Court in its 2010 decision in McDonald v. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 7:46 am
Consequently, it is the States – through the CoP – that bear the main responsibility for reviewing State reports, which may easily create a politicised atmosphere (on such initial concerns, see here). [read post]
24 Jun 2015, 2:50 am
To consider this, the Supreme Court needed to bear in mind the following: (1) it is for the court to determine whether the scheme is proportionate (2) the matter should be approached in the same way the CJEU would approach the issue in enforcement proceedings (3) the court has to decide whether the Board has established that the objectives cannot be attained through a less restrictive scheme (4) this does not mean asking whether the Board’s judgment was “manifestly wrong”… [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 5:35 am
United States. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 12:39 pm
§ 41713(b)(1)) that “prohibits states from enforcing any law ‘relating to rates, routes, or services’ of any air carrier,” Morales v. [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 5:31 pm
The “substantial attention” Judge Kollar cited consists of one 1990 law school law review article, in which the author stated that “When women are compelled to carry and bear children, they are subjected to ‘involuntary servitude‘ in violation of [the Thirteenth] amendment. [read post]
