Search for: "People v. Kelly (1986)" Results 21 - 37 of 37
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Sep 2019, 9:56 am by Eugene Volokh
Many religious people are understandably upset when they have to subsidize blasphemy. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 4:17 am
Weinberger, 475 U.S. 503 (1986) (Jewish Air Force psychologist who objected to a no-headgear rule); Jenkins v. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 11:25 am by Tana Fye
”[7]  Judges charged with making these custody decisions “rarely received the expert testimony of native people who could familiarize [them] with traditional child-rearing practices,” but instead relied upon the testimony of non-Indian social workers who were ignorant of the ways and traditions of Native Americans.[8]  These social workers often advised courts that the abject poverty of many Indian families prevented them from properly parenting their… [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
Kelly, No. 01-2736 "Denial of petitions for writs of habeas corpus are affirmed where although English language deficiency can warrant tolling of the AEDPA limitations period, petitioners have failed to allege circumstances establishing the due diligence required to warrant tolling. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 4:30 am by Betty Lupinacci
  I first heard it in my first year law school tort class, in 1986. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 12:35 pm
In addition, continuing political persecution and globalization incombination with climate change contribute to global migration in ever-growing numbers.Millions of people displaced by war and conflict have tried to find respite and safety in otherstates and increasingly within the borders of the European Union. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 5:00 pm by Craig Robins
  Cynthia Rosicki then went on to New York Law School, graduating in 1986. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am by Ben
In Europe, The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the consent of a copyright holder does not cover the distribution of an object incorporating a work where that object has been altered after its initial marketing to such an extent that it constitutes a new reproduction of that work (Case C‑419/13, Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright) with Eleonora opining that the decision means that that there is no such thing as a general principle of… [read post]