Search for: "Burden v. Thomas" Results 21 - 40 of 2,229
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2024, 8:33 am by familoo
‘Now is the time to reassess presumption of parental involvement’, writes Lea Levine in the April issue of the journal[1]. [read post]
6 Jun 2024, 1:54 pm by Ronald Mann
ShareJustice Clarence Thomas’s opinion for a unanimous court on Thursday in Connelly v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 1:23 pm by Amy Howe
Justice Clarence Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part with the majority. [read post]
15 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"Legislative enactments enjoy a strong presumption of constitutionality and parties challenging a duly enacted statute face the initial burden of demonstrating the statute's invalidity beyond a reasonable doubt" (Delgado v State of New York, 194 AD3d 98, 103 [3d Dept 2021] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], affd 39 NY3d 242 [2022]; see Center for Jud. [read post]
15 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"Legislative enactments enjoy a strong presumption of constitutionality and parties challenging a duly enacted statute face the initial burden of demonstrating the statute's invalidity beyond a reasonable doubt" (Delgado v State of New York, 194 AD3d 98, 103 [3d Dept 2021] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], affd 39 NY3d 242 [2022]; see Center for Jud. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm by admin
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am by admin
As a practical matter, the burden shifts to the party that wishes to challenge the relied upon facts and data to learn more about the cited studies to show that the facts and data are not sufficient under Rule 702(b), and that the testimony is not the product of reliable methods under Rule 702(c). [read post]