Search for: "James v. Scott*" Results 421 - 440 of 1,072
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jan 2017, 1:55 pm by James E. Novak, P.L.L.C.
Arizona Among Highest Increases in Fatal Alcohol-Related Accidents The good news would be that the East Valley Tribune reported on January 8 that driving under the influence (DUI) arrests in Arizona decreased 14 percent from 2014 to 2016. [read post]
24 Dec 2016, 7:00 am by Quinta Jurecic
Orin Kerr responded to April Doss’s earlier post on United States v. [read post]
11 Dec 2016, 11:54 pm by INFORRM
It has been alleged in High Court that James Murdoch was personally involved in authorising the deletion of emails at News International in early 2010 when the phone-hacking scandal was taking off. [read post]
10 Dec 2016, 6:42 am by Quinta Jurecic
And April Doss defended the 9th Circuit’s reading of the government’s ability to use information collected through 702 surveillance in U.S. v. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:30 am by Blog Editorial
This is a live blog of the fourth day of the hearing of the “Brexit” appeal. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am by Blog Editorial
Today’s live blog team comprises Lucy Hayes (Olswang), Anna Phillips (Nabarro), James Gliddon (CMS), Tom Sandeman (Nabarro), Emma Boffey (CMS) and Iona Millership (Olswang). 16.00 The Lord Advocate has now concluded his submissions for today. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 8:03 am by cbroden
The nation’s highest court ruled the execution of an inmate with an intellectual disability violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unjust punishments” in the 2002 case of Atkins v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 8:03 am by cbroden
The nation’s highest court ruled the execution of an inmate with an intellectual disability violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unjust punishments” in the 2002 case of Atkins v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 8:03 am by cbroden
The nation’s highest court ruled the execution of an inmate with an intellectual disability violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unjust punishments” in the 2002 case of Atkins v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am by Blog Editorial
  Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
23 Oct 2016, 4:01 am by SHG
**I received many responses about a letter in Arkell v. [read post]