Search for: "People v. Strong (1994)" Results 21 - 40 of 331
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Feb 2018, 4:56 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
However, the record does not demonstrate that the court was so vexed that it could not be impartial (22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]; see Liteky v United States, 510 US 540, 555-556 [1994]; Hass & Gottlieb v Sook Hi Lee, 55 AD3d 433, 434 [1st Dept 2008]; People v A.S. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 5:00 pm
            Spence created the college in 1994 to train lawyers sticking up for little people against big corporations and the government. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 2:05 pm by INFORRM
There being two legitimate aims, the next question was whether the restriction was proportionate to them; the means chosen to achieve those aim must (a) be rationally connected to the objective and not be arbitrary, unfair or based on irrational considerations, (b) impair the right as little as possible, and (c) be such that their effects on rights are proportional to the objective … (Murphy v IRTC [46] (Barrington J), following Heaney v… [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 5:09 pm
It stands to reason that people will do so as well. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 4:08 am
This being so, since BSKF's mark didn't have any kanji, the two marks were not similar -- and that was an end to the matter.The IPKat thinks the result is correct and suspects that, within the world of British Shorinji Kempo practitioners, where loyalties are strong and passions run high, few people will be in any doubt as to which organisation is which. [read post]
14 Nov 2006, 8:52 am
Asset Recovery Agency hereValentine's Day hereValentine's Day Massacre hereValentine's Day cards here [IPKat advisory: only for people with a strong stomach for sentimental gush and an immunity to the totally banal] [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 7:12 pm by Eugene Volokh
For instance: Janus holds that the First Amendment generally bars compelling people to turn over money to a private organization that will use it for speech.[9] But Rumsfeld v. [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 7:12 pm by Eugene Volokh
For instance: Janus holds that the First Amendment generally bars compelling people to turn over money to a private organization that will use it for speech.[9] But Rumsfeld v. [read post]
13 Apr 2018, 7:40 pm
Party Constitution CPPCC Constitution State Constitution 1945 Amendment VI 1949 Common Program 1954 Amendment I Constitution Promulgated 1956 Amendment VII 1969 Amendment VIII 1973 Amendment IX 1975 Amendment I 1977 Amendment X 1978 Amendment II Amendment II 1982 Amendment XI Amendment III Amendment III 1987 Amendment XII 1988 Amendment IV 1992 Amendment XIII 1993 Amendment V 1994 Amendment IV 1997 Amendment… [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am by Schachtman
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]