Search for: "US v. Smith" Results 4781 - 4800 of 8,556
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 May 2010, 10:02 pm by MacIsaac
 In reaching this conclusion the Court gave the following brief but useful summary of the law: [15] Where there has been a rear-end collision, the onus shifts to the following driver to show that he or she was not at fault:  Robbie v. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 9:58 am by Michael Lombardino and Abby Kotun
This is especially true at the I-9 stage where employers should remember that all applicants are free to use any of the qualifying I-9 documents, including the Employment Authorization Document, which a DACA applicant is more likely to use. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
[Smith v Hager, 185 A.D.2d 612]Demoting an employee for sleeping on duty on two occasions, although a hearing officer found the employee’s supervisor had “condoned” such conduct and the hearing officer had recommended a suspension without pay for three weeks. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 9:41 am
From Smith, it cannot be derived if and, if so, how the enantiomer has actually been obtained in individualized form. [read post]
18 Nov 2015, 8:22 am by Lisa Baird
To read more about the ClearCorrect ruling and the uncertainty that exists in the legal landscape where intellectual property rights and new digital technologies intersect, read Reed Smith attorney Matthew J. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:09 pm
"New York appellate court upholds Atlantic Yards taking - Goldstein v. [read post]
1 May 2023, 4:00 am by Administrator
In the recent case (Andrist v. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 9:22 am
There was no other evidence at all connecting Smith to the crime. [read post]
5 Aug 2018, 5:03 am by admin
She explained the district courts are required to use the sentencing guidelines as a starting point when they resentence a defendant. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 10:09 am by R.J. MacReady
However, I do think it's kind of ironic that Judge Cochran starts off with quotes from the dissenting opinion from Abdul-Kabir v. [read post]