Search for: "Com. v. Learn" Results 21 - 40 of 405
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Nov 2022, 5:52 am by Laurence H. Tribe
A lawyer from outside the Justice Department – as the regulations require – would need to assemble a team, request a budget and learn the case. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 6:54 am
It is  hosted by Völkerrechtsblog and brilliantly co-organized by Justine Batura (Völkerrechtsblog), Anna Sophia Tiedeke (Völkerrechtsblog) and Michael Riegner (University of Erfurt; co-founder of the Völkerrechtsblog), who will feature as guest editor of the Symposium. [read post]
29 May 2022, 8:42 am by Russell Knight
The below is an amalgamation of what I learned coupled with Illinois law about how to do the best cross-examination possible in an Illinois divorce. [read post]
3 May 2022, 11:15 am by fjhinojosa
Gonzalez’s article The New Batson: Opening the Door of the Jury Deliberation Room after Peña-Rodriguez v. [read post]
16 Mar 2022, 12:14 pm by Rebecca Plevel
In her time on the Federal District Court, Judge Childs has ruled on a variety of cases, including Bradacs v. [read post]
31 Dec 2021, 5:00 am by Josh Blackman
Check out our web site to learn more about the Virtual Supreme Court competition. [read post]
30 Nov 2021, 6:29 pm
Artificial intelligence and machine learning brings another layer of complexity to this brave new world of algorithmic law, especially because of demands for more transparency, the right for an explanation, and for algorithmic auditing.Likewise, courts are already experimenting with digital justice, by moving from Alternative Dispute Resolution to Online Dispute Resolution. [read post]
13 Jul 2021, 5:30 am by Sherron Watkins
First, he looked into dumping me on the street, to fire me, and likely embark on a plan of attack I’ve since learned about from other whistleblowers – smear the messenger as a disgruntled former employee and a nutcase. [read post]
4 Jul 2021, 6:43 am by Russell Knight
Industrial Com., 343 NE 2d 504 – Ill: Supreme Court 1976 “[T]he expert’s testimony is but “the opinion of the witness given on facts assumed to be true” McKenzie v. [read post]