Search for: "People v. Standard (1986)" Results 341 - 360 of 645
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Aug 2022, 12:51 pm by Eugene Volokh
No. 4J, 301 Or. 358 (1986), appeal dismissed for want of substantial federal question, 480 U.S. 942 (1987) (over the dissenting votes of Brennan, Marshall, & O'Connor, JJ.); United States v. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
In denying plaintiff's motion, the court determined that a reasonable jury could have concluded that Miller's "mistake and the shooting that resulted" did not violate any applicable standard of care and hinged on a credibility determination best left for the jury (US Dist Ct, ND NY, 3:13 CV 107, Sept. 27, 2017, McAvoy, Sr. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
In denying plaintiff's motion, the court determined that a reasonable jury could have concluded that Miller's "mistake and the shooting that resulted" did not violate any applicable standard of care and hinged on a credibility determination best left for the jury (US Dist Ct, ND NY, 3:13 CV 107, Sept. 27, 2017, McAvoy, Sr. [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 3:48 pm
I expect Student Loans to be the scourge of this Generation; I routinely talk to wonderful people who have gigantic student loans, and have no chance of getting them paid any time during this depression. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 3:26 pm by Erin Miller
Pennsylvania (1986), which allows a judge to find facts that trigger a mandatory minimum sentence. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 6:28 am by rainey Reitman
The industry standard very first step is make sure that you have the alias security@company.com available as an email address that can take reports from third-party researchers. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
Even when modernizing the law of comment (WIC Radio & Mair v Simpson [2008] 2 SCR 420) and creating a new “public interest responsible communication” defence (Grant v Torstar Corp [2009] SCC 61) the court failed to take the step of importing Charter analysis or standards into the common law[12] As to the English solution of Reynolds, Eady J comments sadly that the Reynolds defence “seems hardly ever to be used in litigation. [read post]