Search for: "MARTIN v. STATE"
Results 3321 - 3340
of 4,061
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2024, 5:13 am
The High Court agreed in R (Harrison) v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] EWHC 2096 (Admin) that the current lack of provision for legal humanist weddings in England and Wales was in breach of Article 9 ECHR. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 5:48 am
In Yumul v. [read post]
29 Nov 2007, 9:18 pm
He's posted a PDF of Jones v. [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 1:12 pm
As of 3:58 Eastern Time, the docket doesn't reflect the freeing, though it does recount the January 5 date.John Kindley at People v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 7:57 am
United States. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 9:24 am
Bartnicki v. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 7:00 am
Supreme Court held in Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 4:00 am
”[72] Justice L’Heureux-Dubé, however, did not agree that an expression stated in the positive (i.e., a “significant contributing cause”) meant the same thing as one stated in the negative (i.e., “not a trivial cause”). [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 11:57 am
Aston Martin, No. 6:11-cv-00034 (E.D. [read post]
7 Nov 2022, 2:57 am
Newspaper Journalism and regulation The BBC has ruled that several remarks made by News presenter, Martine Croxall breached their impartiality rules, the Press Gazette reports. [read post]
22 Oct 2024, 7:07 am
Lockheed Martin Corp. [read post]
24 Mar 2017, 8:00 am
See Hall v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 1:05 am
Supreme Court's Lewis v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 4:28 am
The case is State v. [read post]
11 Nov 2010, 8:05 am
Martin was 17 at the time and cannot be put to death as a result. [read post]
8 Jan 2017, 4:05 pm
Almost every newspaper, local and national has carried hysterical and inaccurate pieces setting out doomsday scenarios if section 40 is enacted and consistently misdescribing the Leveson system of audited self-regulation as “state backed” (or even “state”) regulation. [read post]
30 Mar 2014, 5:05 pm
In the case of Profumo v Bradley (No.4) ([2014] WASC 94) Martin CJ dismissed a claim for slander in relation to statements made in the course of telephone conversations by the defendant (who is the plaintiff’s sister). [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 9:01 pm
In other words, Roberts and Ginsburg were in unexpected positions.This reminded me of another Supreme Court case pertaining to state tax issues, 2015’s Comptroller of Treasury of Md. v. [read post]
23 Dec 2023, 7:16 pm
Her dissertation title is, however, as Martin Short would say, a bit of a tell. [read post]
15 Jul 2022, 4:00 am
Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. [read post]
