Search for: "State v. S. M." Results 301 - 320 of 28,560
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Apr 2024, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
From Friday's decision by Judge Denise Cote (S.D.N.Y.) in Farrakhan v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 12:08 pm
" (Article V, Section 8).I'm quite confident that others knew about this quirk in the California pardon scheme, but I didn't. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Foran, Discrimination and Manifestation of Belief: Higgs v Farmor's School [2023] EAT 89, (Industrial Law Journal, Forthcoming).Jack M. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
For many business economists and legal academics, the purpose of any business organization is simply stated: to maximize profits. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 4:37 pm by INFORRM
Justice Lee stated that the evidence may change the outcome of the case and extends beyond Lehrmann’s credibility. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 2:07 pm by Larry
Such is the case in Ninestar Corporation et al. v. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 9:30 pm by ernst
Joy Milligan and Bertrall Ross, UVA Law, “discuss how we should interpret a Constitution that was not written for or drafted by ‘We the People,” on the Sidebar podcast.Prairie View A&M history professor Ronald Goodwin discussed the early Republic and how Americans tried to define equality and interpret the Constitution in the first decades of the United States. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 5:31 pm by Josh Blackman
I'm sensing a pattern: one way that District Court judges in Texas can avoid the Fifth Circuit's appellate review is to send cases to more friendly jurisdictions. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 6:05 am by George Croner
” While the Second Circuit noted in its decision in U.S. v. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:33 pm by Administrator
Such an analysis reflects piecemeal reasoning based on how the state intends to use the information in a specific case, contrary to the broad, purposive approach required by s. 8’s constitutional status. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Indeed, as one federal court recently stated, “the ‘crypto’ nomenclature may be of recent vintage, but the challenged transactions fall comfortably within the framework that courts have used to identify securities for nearly eighty years. [read post]