Search for: "Burden v. Burden"
Results 4241 - 4260
of 30,987
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 May 2007, 4:14 am
A comment to my May 5, 2007 post entitled The TSM test after KSR v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 6:14 am
This is important because the movant bears the initial burden in such a case under Lepis v. [read post]
Case Comment: Sadovska & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Scotland) [2017] UKSC 54
31 Jul 2017, 3:30 am
Established rights must not be taken away because the burden of proof rests on the accusing party. [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 9:14 pm
Missouri v. [read post]
14 Aug 2013, 4:45 am
The crux of the particular case, Windsor v. [read post]
20 Dec 2008, 2:56 pm
[Isn't the question of standing the defendant's burden?] [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 7:05 am
Though in Moncrieffe v. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 5:31 am
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit 2000).If the moving party meets its initial burden, the burden shifts to the non-moving party to produce evidence supporting its claims or defenses. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 7:02 am
In O’Brien v. [read post]
3 May 2007, 10:38 am
The net effect of the court advising the jury that the State had no obligation to produce evidence, which was indisputably available to it, either explicitly or implicitly relieved the State, in the minds of the jurors, of the burden to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 5:00 am
[Plaintiff] agreed to participate in [defendant’s] sales video.Polett v. [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 2:16 pm
In order even to qualify as a “religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society” eligible for this exemption, an entity must be “primarily religious,” which requires at a minimum that the entity be (i) a nonprofit organization that (ii) is organized for a religious purpose, (iii) is engaged primarily in carrying out that religious purpose, (iv) holds itself out to the public as an entity for carrying out that religious purpose, and (v) does not… [read post]
10 Oct 2023, 7:08 am
Suriano v. [read post]
6 Aug 2013, 9:24 am
The recent United States Supreme Court ruling in United States v. [read post]
15 Jun 2014, 3:25 pm
In the case of People v Scott, 63 NY2d 518 [1984], the criminal court held that a roadblock or checkpoint stop is a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 5:00 am
In Hutton v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 12:56 pm
Code § 425.16; Ruiz v. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 1:27 pm
It'd lessen the burden on the appellate courts. [read post]
21 May 2010, 4:57 pm
KIUC is charged with nine counts each of taking threatened species in violation of 16 USC §§ 1538(a)(1)(G) and 1540(b)(1) and Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, § 17.31(c) and (a); and taking migratory birds in violation of 16 USC §§ 703(a), 707(a).I haven't had time to do more than scan it and I'm no expert at environmental law - especially endangered species (we'll learn about it together as the case progresses) - but I notice that many of the… [read post]
