Search for: "State v. English"
Results 3221 - 3240
of 6,457
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jul 2010, 3:21 am
”Citing In Remus v. [read post]
3 Feb 2022, 6:00 am
Unfortunately, just because a provision makes sense in plain English, this does not necessarily mean that it is enforceable in court. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 3:30 am
Rajesh Batra v. [read post]
26 Dec 2011, 3:03 am
Annandale, N.S.W. : Federation Press, 2010 v, 250 p. : ill. ; 21 cm. [read post]
2 Aug 2007, 11:44 am
So when a Wisconsin state court lets loose with an excellent preemption decision, we figure it's worth taking a look.Blunt involved a claimed defect in a cardiac defibrillator - one of those implanted gadgets that stands by to stabilize heart rhythm (love that word, unique in the English language with more syllables than vowels) in people with chronic heart problems. [read post]
9 May 2016, 10:44 pm
The Appellate Division rejected this argument in late April 2016 in State v. [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 6:35 pm
The idea of the illegality doctrine comes from Everet v. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 2:16 pm
Grip-Pak, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2018, 8:43 pm
He proclaimed Islam as the State religion. [read post]
4 Nov 2018, 4:03 pm
In Dred Scott v. [read post]
27 Nov 2010, 4:56 pm
“something the English haven’t yet picked up on in the current debate as to libel law reform is that our law is effectively identical at present albeit with a very different costs regime, so if the UK Parliament reforms English libel law alone we can expect to see a straightforward transfer of litigation to Edinburgh“ This suggestion inspired us to look into the state of defamation law in Scotland. [read post]
15 Apr 2022, 8:21 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Dec 2012, 10:53 am
GTE Sylvania, Verizon v. [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 11:20 am
"Well, we can start with the Supreme Court of the United States: see, e.g., Thompson v. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 3:44 pm
Justice Rothstein stated as follows in the CBC v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 9:03 am
Italy’s Minister of Culture Gennaro Sangiuliano echoed this sentiment, expressing appreciation for the ruling and stating that “[i]t must be said that the use for commercial purposes for cultural goods must be paid while it must be free for images for educational and study purposes. [read post]
19 Dec 2006, 5:25 am
According to a decision released last week by New York State's highest court, your body parts aren't worth much, particularly after you're dead.In Colavito v. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 10:45 am
As the court noted recently in Riley v. [read post]
7 Jul 2012, 1:41 am
Granite State, supra, 76 F.3d at 1030-31. [read post]
