Search for: "In re P. F."
Results 3921 - 3940
of 4,165
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Apr 2008, 6:45 am
Morgan Eastern District of Kentucky at FrankfortBOYCE F. [read post]
18 Apr 2008, 5:27 pm
In re Stewart, 175 F.3d 796 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. 1997). [read post]
17 Apr 2008, 3:22 am
Demographic data were obtained from OMS files, while incidents of re-offending were taken from CPIC information. [read post]
17 Apr 2008, 3:00 am
Importantly, the Act does not specify that such clinicians must be forensic experts, and suggests a risk assessment may still be made even if the offender does not cooperate fully (or at all) in the examination process.Section 8 outlines what these assessment reports must entail: (a) whether the 'offender has a propensity to commit relevant offences in the future'; (b) their 'pattern and progression' of sexual offending, and the 'nature of any likely future sexual… [read post]
15 Apr 2008, 7:49 am
., 834 F.2d 510 (5th Cir.1987); State ex rel. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 2:25 pm
., M-F. [read post]
12 Apr 2008, 4:20 am
C, P 10. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 7:59 am
Representing Powell Family of Yakima, LLC and Brickmans: F. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 4:18 am
See In re Bennett Funding Group, Inc., 336 F.3d 94, 99-100 (2d Cir. 2003). [read post]
2 Apr 2008, 8:30 am
P. 26. [read post]
1 Apr 2008, 8:46 am
., 275 F. [read post]
1 Apr 2008, 4:15 am
Allen, 633 F.2d 1282, 1290 (9th Cir. 1980)). [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 9:59 am
See In re Rezulin Products Liability Litigation, 309 F. [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 12:27 am
En este post Ramiro dice que un esquema diferenciado que impusiera menores retenciones a productores chicos tiene altas posibilidades de inconstitucionalidad por el temita de igualdad en las cargas públicas. [read post]
23 Mar 2008, 7:13 am
Bateman (In re Bateman), 515 F.3d 272 (2008). [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 12:56 am
Attorney Michael P. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 7:21 pm
Stolt-Nielsen S.A., 524 F. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 6:00 am
Of course, whether reliance and causation are elements of a UCL claim is an unresolved question that the Supreme Court is expected to address in In re Tobacco and Pfizer. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 5:03 am
See In re Grand Jury (Impounded), 138 F.3d at 982. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 2:29 am
Antonio F. [read post]
