Search for: "State v. Good Bear" Results 4361 - 4380 of 5,191
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jul 2020, 12:55 am by Tessa Shepperson
So good news that a crook has been rightfully punished. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:53 am by David Kopel
Supreme Court affirmed in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 2:31 pm by INFORRM
Bearing in mind the State’s margin of appreciation, the Court held that there was no violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression under Article 10. [read post]
20 Mar 2008, 2:15 am
The United States Supreme Court, in the little known 1975 case of US v. [read post]
31 Mar 2008, 5:59 am
Reg. 46,716-843 (Aug. 21, 2007)(to be codified at 37 C.F.R. pt. 1)(the "Final Rules") under his decision in Tafas v. [read post]
27 Mar 2024, 3:33 am by SHG
In Cedar Point Nursery v. [read post]
14 Nov 2013, 7:00 am by Carrie Cordero
And there are good reasons why Congress tore it out of the playbook a few years ago. [read post]
20 Nov 2007, 11:44 pm
Gun Case Legal Times The Supreme Court announced Tuesday it will take up the case of District of Columbia v. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:00 pm by Austin Sarat
”Camus’s argument that the more people know about capital punishment the less they support it entered American jurisprudence in Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall’s concurring opinion in Furman v. [read post]
12 Jan 2009, 12:14 am
  Factor that into the decision and see how comfortable you are with advising a defendant to take a plea.Update:  As raised by our Hinterlands correspondent, Kathleen, and showing a fortuitous symmetry, two of today's posts meld perfectly as shown in the Vermont Supreme Court's decision in State v. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 2:16 pm by Andrew Berger
The courts who focus on actual damages state “statutory damages should bear some relation to actual damages suffered” and set statutory damages at a multiple of actual damage. [read post]
28 Aug 2024, 4:09 am by SHG
The lead case on this issue is Eastex, Inc. v. [read post]