Search for: "JOHN DOES 1-20" Results 3341 - 3360 of 3,437
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Jun 2007, 1:53 am
S 1063 First Act: 01/16/07 referred to governmental employeesLast Act: 05/29/07 substituted by s106305/29/07 returned to senate LAW / CRIM-PROCA2407 Sweeney (MS) -- Authorizes defendants to make electronic appearances in pending criminal actions in the county of Suffolk Same as S 3536 Chapter Signed Date Effective Date29  05/14/2007 provided that the amendment to subd 1 of §182.20 of the criminal… [read post]
3 Jun 2007, 11:03 am
At about 1:20, Hillary Clinton heats up, talking about diplomacy and Iran. [read post]
28 May 2007, 4:27 am
"I've been puzzled over the years as to why we haven't gotten capitalpunishment passed," said Delegate John Overington, R-Berkeley. [read post]
27 May 2007, 1:19 pm
Being Jack Sparrow: One of the most hilariously inspired scenes in movie history is in Being John Malkovich, when John enters his own mind. [read post]
20 May 2007, 6:34 pm
Unapologetically into baking, craft-making, country music, and old school R&B, in spite of whatever that does to non-existent hipster street cred. 20. [read post]
12 May 2007, 10:03 pm
More recently, however, the Court or Chief Justice John G. [read post]
11 May 2007, 10:03 pm
(1) The Supreme Court On April 2, the Court refused to review the Feb. 20 decision of the D.C. [read post]
11 May 2007, 7:20 am
And don't get on any small aircraft.Patty VinyardBelleville, ILFrom: John DoraemiSent: Sat 5/5/2007 10:22 PMSubject: The immorality of calling Iraq a "mistake. [read post]
9 May 2007, 5:25 pm
Moreover, in none of those four cases does the Federal Circuit apply the holding of Sakraida. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 4:50 pm
John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 U.S. 1 (1966)) regarding the obviousness of patents "based on the combination of elements found in the prior art" where there the combination "does no more than yield predictable results. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 10:51 am
John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 U.S. 1 (1966)) regarding the obviousness of patents "based on the combination of elements found in the prior art" where there the combination "does no more than yield predictable results. [read post]