Search for: "U.S. v. Ball*" Results 3161 - 3180 of 3,547
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 May 2011, 8:08 pm by The Legal Blog
In this regard, Para 3.4 (v) of the said Manual reads as follows:"(v) In cases of alleged sex offences such as intercourse with a female child, forcible rape, indecent liberties or perversion, it is important that the victim, as well as the accused, be made available for interview and polygraph examination. [read post]
9 Sep 2007, 10:32 pm
Additionally, the bill would put a halt to prepayment penalties for subprime loans along with preventing borrowers with prime loans from taking out subprime loans.[42] Senator Dodge's propose bill seems to be spearheading the efforts for the Federal Government to regulate the U.S. mortgage market.[43] V. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 10:00 pm by Jim Sedor
She has said she would not vote to confirm a nominee who was hostile to Roe v. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 4:39 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  The plaintiff shareholder attempted to argue, in reliance on the First Circuit’s 1996 decision in Shaw v. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 4:39 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  The plaintiff shareholder attempted to argue, in reliance on the First Circuit’s 1996 decision in Shaw v. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:53 am by David Kopel
Based on history and precedent, legislatures may regulate the mode of carry, as the the U.S. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Threats against lawmakers have reached an all-time high of 9,600, according to U.S. [read post]
5 Aug 2022, 6:01 am by Quinta Jurecic, Molly E. Reynolds
  Likewise, the Jan. 6 committee’s extensive use of visual aids and video clips of witness testimony—which New York Times television critic James Poniewozik described as “more the stuff of a high-gloss streaming documentary than anything we’re used to seeing from the U.S. [read post]
5 May 2020, 11:51 am by William Ford
The subcommittee staff’s analysis of the constitutionality of remote voting and participation focused heavily on whether a proposed change to the Senate’s rules, or the adoption of a new rule, would comply with the three-part test the Supreme Court established in United States v. [read post]