Search for: "State v. Irvin" Results 401 - 420 of 608
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jun 2010, 4:10 pm by tjsllibrary
Considerable emphasis is placed upon the twentieth century, especially the period since the 1972 Furman v. [read post]
4 Aug 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
From that it follows that it is impermissible to base state policies on claimsabout the divine will. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 1:30 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
Harris, University of California, Davis, School of Law Stephen Lee, University of California, Irvine School of Law Guadalupe T. [read post]
16 May 2019, 9:05 pm by Bobby Chen
Holden of Oklahoma State University discussed the regulation of sports betting following the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. [read post]
10 Jan 2023, 7:32 am by Derek T. Muller
Interestingly, there are not any California law schools on the list, a cohort I had assumed might benefit most from the state’s difficult bar examination and perhaps a higher “wait and see” approach from prospective employers.Now, to schools more likely to be adversely affected.SCHOOLS LIKELY TO BE ADVERSELY AFFECTEDAt grad v. 10 monthMassachusetts-Dartmouth 33.9%, 47.5%Yale 89.2%, 89.2%Stanford 88.5%, 89.0%BYU 82.8%, 85.9%Northwestern 87.9%, 89.5%CUNY 36.1%,… [read post]
10 Jan 2023, 7:32 am by Derek T. Muller
Interestingly, there are not any California law schools on the list, a cohort I had assumed might benefit most from the state’s difficult bar examination and perhaps a higher “wait and see” approach from prospective employers.Now, to schools more likely to be adversely affected.SCHOOLS LIKELY TO BE ADVERSELY AFFECTEDAt grad v. 10 monthMassachusetts-Dartmouth 33.9%, 47.5%Yale 89.2%, 89.2%Stanford 88.5%, 89.0%BYU 82.8%, 85.9%Northwestern 87.9%, 89.5%CUNY 36.1%,… [read post]
16 Aug 2018, 7:03 am by James Yang
Boston University’s patent claim invalidated for failing to enable its full scope In Boston University v. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 1:52 pm by James Yang
Supreme Court case, specifically, Teva Pharamceuticals USA, Inc. v. [read post]