Search for: "v. JONES"
Results 4381 - 4400
of 9,904
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jan 2014, 9:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 9:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 3:29 pm
Jones v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 8:14 am
As Deputy AAG, Harbour argued State Oil v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 2:21 pm
<> Jones v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 12:46 am
The Court of Appeal rejected what it considered to be a suggestion by the appellants that there should effectively be a re-hearing of the issue of whether the discrimination was justified given that the right to appeal was on a point of law only under s.13(1), Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, noting the Supreme Court’s guidance on the dividing line between law and fact in R(Jones) v First-tier tribunal [2013] UKSC 19 (citing paragraph 16 of Jones). [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 12:46 am
The Court of Appeal rejected what it considered to be a suggestion by the appellants that there should effectively be a re-hearing of the issue of whether the discrimination was justified given that the right to appeal was on a point of law only under s.13(1), Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, noting the Supreme Court’s guidance on the dividing line between law and fact in R(Jones) v First-tier tribunal [2013] UKSC 19 (citing paragraph 16 of Jones). [read post]
4 Jan 2014, 9:20 am
Jones. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 11:20 am
The Supreme Court's June 2013 ruling on U.S. v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 6:25 am
Citing the Supreme Court case of Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 5:47 pm
See United States v. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 5:14 am
Though Jones v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 10:01 am
App. 1995); Jones v. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:10 am
., Habush v. [read post]
29 Dec 2013, 12:31 pm
For three years — from October 2006 through December 2009 — while I was a partner at Jones Day, I co-hosted the Drug and Device Law Blog with Jim Beck, of Dechert. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 3:37 pm
A “deviation from standard procedure may raise an inference of discrimination,” the court explained (Jones v Ottenberg’s Bakers, Inc). [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 2:37 pm
And yet, following the DC Circuit's decision in United States v Maynard (which eventually became United States v Jones when it was decided by the Supreme Court), individual jurists and scholars have increasingly embraced a mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment, under which a discrete action (watching someone in public, seeking their phone records via a grand jury subpoena) becomes unconstitutional when government officials engage in that action too intensively and… [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 6:18 am
Estate of Karen Parrish v. [read post]
