Search for: "MATTER OF M J S" Results 4841 - 4860 of 4,908
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Mar 2007, 11:14 am
AEI, I'm certain, is very happy that this has gone well, but it had reasons to be doubtful before the fact. [read post]
6 Mar 2007, 3:19 am
Hartman, JudgeRepresenting Appellant (Defendant): Kenneth M. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 12:04 am
If two recent appellate rulings are any indication, writes litigator Howard J. [read post]
2 Mar 2007, 3:21 am
Vincent, of Vincent & Vincent, Riverton, Wyoming; Paul J. [read post]
2 Mar 2007, 1:27 am
Green QUEENS COUNTYJuvenile Law Agency Meets Burden of Establishing Independent Source for Victim's In-Court Identification Matter of Aliya M. [read post]
28 Feb 2007, 12:52 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKTortsCity Cannot Limit Liability, Under 19th Century Law, To $14.4 Million in Suit Over Staten Island Ferry Crash Matter of the City of New York (M/V Andrew J. [read post]
23 Feb 2007, 8:33 am
Beal said, "If he's used it to testify from, then I'm allowed to have the entire copy to review. [read post]
23 Feb 2007, 4:46 am
Grant, JudgeRepresenting Appellant (Defendant): Kenneth M. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 12:54 am
What got my attention was the response [subscription site] to Stacher's op-ed piece that was penned by two Boston University law professors, Tamar Frankel and Wendy J. [read post]
19 Feb 2007, 6:35 am
I'd say the best coverage of the ongoing federal judicial salary discussion comes from Slate's Dahlia Lithwick, but the WSJ's Ben Winograd has an interesting point to make about the economic comparisons that are being used.I like the way Lithwick critiques the arguments that Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy have made, and I agree with her that perhaps the most persuasive point we have have heard was made by Kennedy: "Of the nine Article III judges who… [read post]
18 Feb 2007, 1:42 pm
Something I look for when I’m assessing a website is the site’s conversion elements. [read post]
12 Feb 2007, 8:09 am
The Board noted that the Respondent's unit employees, who were not members of Local 1125 at the time of the merger, were not included in the merger process because nonmembers do not have a right under the International Union's constitution or the Local's bylaws to participate in internal union matters such as a merger discussion or vote. [read post]