Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 3361 - 3380
of 15,324
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 May 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V (1) Extradition shall not be granted if: (a) the person sought would, if proceeded against in the territory of the requested Party for the offense for which his extradition is requested, be entitled to be discharged on the grounds of a previous acquittal or conviction in the territory of the requesting or requested Party or of a third State; or (b) the prosecution for the offense for which extradition is requested has become barred by lapse of time according to… [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V (1) Extradition shall not be granted if: (a) the person sought would, if proceeded against in the territory of the requested Party for the offense for which his extradition is requested, be entitled to be discharged on the grounds of a previous acquittal or conviction in the territory of the requesting or requested Party or of a third State; or (b) the prosecution for the offense for which extradition is requested has become barred by lapse of time according to… [read post]
24 May 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V (1) Extradition shall not be granted if: (a) the person sought would, if proceeded against in the territory of the requested Party for the offense for which his extradition is requested, be entitled to be discharged on the grounds of a previous acquittal or conviction in the territory of the requesting or requested Party or of a third State; or (b) the prosecution for the offense for which extradition is requested has become barred by lapse of time according to… [read post]
6 Aug 2024, 11:32 pm
It argues that the state cannot be held liable for anything done in the exercise of legislative power. [read post]
22 Aug 2018, 7:31 pm
To date we have reported decisions focusing on debt collection practices (see Kuschner v. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 4:57 am
., United States v. [read post]
11 Oct 2020, 11:43 am
The Court answered it in the negative in this week’s judgment in Aktiebolaget Östgötatrafiken v Patent-och registreringsverket, C‑456/19. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 8:27 pm
Commonwealth, 34 Va.App. 74, 81, 538 S.E.2d 316, 319 (2000) (where owner of bag opened bag for officer after officer (a) unlawfully seized it, (b) asked owner whether it contained contraband, (c) received response that bag contained knife, and (d) stated that ‘she needed to see [knife],’ Commonwealth showed “ ‘mere submission to a claim of lawful authority’ ” rather than consent to search that was “ ‘freely and voluntarily… [read post]
28 Mar 2010, 11:30 pm
(See 19 C. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 7:55 am
Shifting to a focus on market transactions as a proposal: in talking to people who work in the innovation industries, this is their perspective, but also doctrinally on to something, b/c many courts conceptualized patents in the 19th c. this way, which led to patent licensing market. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 2:18 pm
P. 166a(b), (c); Frost Nat'l Bank v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 9:37 am
See AKM LLC, d/b/a Volks Constructors v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 8:01 am
See AKM LLC, d/b/a Volks Constructors v. [read post]
7 May 2020, 10:25 am
State v. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 3:05 am
.United States v. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 1:00 am
R (A) (a Child) (by her litigation friend B) v Secretary of State for Health, heard 2 November 2016. [read post]
9 Dec 2021, 4:36 am
In Johnson v. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 2:00 am
Willocks v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 11:05 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
18 May 2018, 4:50 am
§§ 554(b)–(c), 557(c); Dell Inc. v. [read post]
