Search for: "People v. May (1989)" Results 321 - 340 of 1,288
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2010, 4:38 am by J
We here at NL pride ourselves on providing comprehensive coverage of housing law (or, at least as comprehensive as six people who do this in their spare time can be) and that includes updates on leasehold property related matters. [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 12:39 am by INFORRM
China The Fei Chang Dao blog has an article that looks at China’s censorship of the Tiananmen Square protests and massacre on the 33rd Anniversary of 4 June 1989. [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 7:01 am by Russell Knight
This is why people hire lawyers for their divorce…so everything is done properly. [read post]
23 Aug 2007, 8:06 am
It's an unfortunate fact of life that there are a lot of prescription drugs out there that people can also use to get high. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 9:30 am
Jan. 7, 2014) (“the class must be adequately defined and clearly ascertainable before a class action may proceed”); Xavier v. [read post]
5 Oct 2016, 6:36 am
James, supra (`Because a person may voluntarily waive his Fourth Amendment rights, no warrant is required where the defendant consents to a search’).U.S. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 12:35 am
A very important negative is that Dominican citizens are subject to many restrictions when travelling.5) As explained in Afroyim v. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 5:31 pm by Brian Shiffrin
And appellate courts have repeatedly rejected challenges to these arbitrarily time limits (see People v Jean, 75 NY2d 744 [trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting counsel questioning to 15 minutes in first two rounds and 10 minutes in third round of voir dire]; People v Davis, 166 AD2d 453 [2d Dept], lv denied 76 NY2d 985 [1990] [15 minute restriction in first round followed by 10 minutes in second and third rounds not an abuse of discretion];… [read post]
25 May 2012, 5:23 pm by INFORRM
Hence, even though section 205(7) permits a court to make an in camera order, in In re R [1989] IR 126, the Supreme Court unanimously emphasised that such order would only pass constitutional muster if a public hearing would obstruct impede the doing of justice as between the parties. [read post]
10 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar and Jason Mazzone
One example may be the federal Flag Protection Act of 1989 enacted and enforced in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier that year, in Texas v. [read post]