Search for: "FORD v. BURDEN"
Results 381 - 400
of 439
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jan 2011, 1:21 pm
“It has long been the rule in Missouri that on cross-examination, a witness may be asked any questions which tend to test his accuracy, veracity or credibility…” Sandy Ford Ranch, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 10:39 am
” McCreary Cty. v. [read post]
22 May 2016, 7:17 am
Google bears the burden of proof, but its defense is incredibly weak. [read post]
10 Feb 2018, 2:24 pm
” McCreary Cty. v. [read post]
8 Feb 2020, 9:58 am
., LP v. [read post]
8 Aug 2017, 4:43 pm
Google’s First Amendment claim has a straightforward component based on a 1999 case, Ford v. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 1:39 pm
” White v. [read post]
5 Oct 2020, 8:17 am
” Finally, courts “should be careful to assess the burdens imposed on the President by a subpoena. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 12:24 pm
The Supreme Court established standards to assess whether severely mentally ill inmates are competent to be executed in a 1986 case, Ford v. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 6:00 am
President Ford vetoed major amendments intended to tighten the statute after several narrowing judicial constructions; a Democratic-controlled Congress overrode. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 4:00 am
Ford Motor Co., No. 08-1082 (6th Cir. [read post]
15 May 2009, 7:49 am
Lyght, 441 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2006), discussed below, in Ford v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 1:29 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 11:33 am
To give the reader some idea of the artificial flavor of Egilman’s pomposity, paragraph 8 of his remarkable declaration avers” “My views on the scientific standards for the determination of cause-effect relationships (medical epistemology) have been cited by the Massachusetts Supreme Court (Vassallo v. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 11:23 am
The Supreme Court further observed that the Stateconceded that the claim at issue did not ripen until the"new evidence" provided support for the competency claim:The State acknowledges that Ford-based incompetencyclaims, as a general matter, are not ripe untilafter the time has run to file a first federalhabeas petition.Panetti v. [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 8:00 am
Huskey v. [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 2:33 pm
: Nine v IceTV: (International Law Office) Benelux Some new rules of the Director-General of the Benelux Organisation for Intellectual Property with regard to trade mark filings refused on absolute grounds and withdrawal of oppositions: (Class 46) Brazil Brazil exports agricultural technology to developing world: (IP tango) Canada Conservatives website faces claims of copyright infringement: (Michael Geist), Canada’s trade mark opposition practice… [read post]
20 Aug 2011, 4:00 am
Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21), 49 U.S.C. 42121, ordering an award of back pay. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 8:40 pm
Arnstein v. [read post]
16 Mar 2020, 6:30 am
For example, in Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
