Search for: "JOHNSON v. THE STATE" Results 4501 - 4520 of 8,030
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jun 2013, 3:59 am by Terry Hart
The state of things in totalitarian countries may induce us to revise this opinion. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 10:50 am by John J. Sullivan
 But the roles were reversed in the diversity jurisdiction dispute addressed by the Third Circuit in Johnson v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 1:23 pm by Adam Gillette
Some might remember that the parties in Lochner v. [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 11:56 am by Raffaela Wakeman
And as we saw in the Boston Marathon bombing incident, home-grown terrorists or terrorists who are sleeper cells inside the United States are a threat. . . [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 11:06 am by Don Cruse
SUSAN COMBS, COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND GREG ABBOTT, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF TEXAS v. [read post]
22 May 2013, 9:01 am by Gritsforbreakfast
IANAL, but my personal view was that SB 187 did not provide enough discretion on sentencing to comply with the Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. [read post]
20 May 2013, 9:26 am by Kathryn Fenderson Scott
Renewable Fuel Standard Program EPA is also responsible for developing and implementing regulations to ensure that transportation fuel sold in the United States contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel. [read post]
15 May 2013, 8:01 am by Dan Ernst
Before being appointed to the Supreme Court by President Lyndon Johnson, Marshall was a lawyer for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Federal Judge (1961-1965), and Solicitor General of the United States (1965-1966). [read post]
10 May 2013, 9:00 am by P. Andrew Torrez
 However, a state court found in Preston's favor on Thursday and required the county to pay Preston $700,000 in attorneys' fees. [read post]
9 May 2013, 10:12 am by Benjamin Wittes
Grant, rather than Andrew Johnson, Commander-in-Chief of the military)? [read post]
7 May 2013, 8:53 am
This was explained by Kitchin J in Novartis AG v Johnson & Johnson Medical Ltd [2009] EWHC 1671 (Pat) at [122] as follows, having cited a passage from G2/98: “I discern from this passage that the EPO considers it is permissible to afford different priority dates to different parts of a patent claim where those parts represent a limited number of clearly defined alternative subject-matters and those alternative subject-matters have been disclosed (and are enabled)… [read post]