Search for: "People v Word"
Results 5101 - 5120
of 17,914
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Apr 2019, 8:30 am
[u]sing the Internet ... for the purpose of posting ... electronically written words, images and/or videos which threaten, harass or defame and/or slander the other spouse .... [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 7:05 am
That question stumped people. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 5:22 am
Electronic Recycling Ass’n v. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 4:17 am
Does this rhetorical distinction, Identity Politics v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 4:52 pm
In her judgment (Stocker v Stocker [2018] EWCA Civ 170), Sharp LJ remarked “…that the use of dictionaries does not form part of the process of determining the natural and ordinary meaning of words, because what matters is the impression conveyed by the words to the ordinary reader when they are read, and it is this that the judge must identify. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 1:05 pm
In other words, existing sanctions already serve as a powerful deterrent for persons and entities considering doing business with the IRGC—but their effect is primarily on people or entities connected to the U.S. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 11:22 am
Romano v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 9:11 am
In many cases, I didn’t use the exact words of the participants. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 8:20 am
The proposal uses the word “reasonable” twice. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 8:19 am
Rasabout, and People v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 8:18 am
Rasabout, and People v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:50 am
Aug. 29, 2004) (noting that the trial court had upheld a narrowly drawn criminal libel statute; the defendant did not argue the First Amendment on appeal); People v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:50 am
Aug. 29, 2004) (noting that the trial court had upheld a narrowly drawn criminal libel statute; the defendant did not argue the First Amendment on appeal); People v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:33 am
Commonwealth v. [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 3:31 pm
The people of Los Angeles and cities across the country deserve safe streets. [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 5:03 am
Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution prohibits “Bill[s] of Attainder,” laws that, under Supreme Court precedent, “legislatively determine[] guilt and inflict[] punishment upon an identifiable individual without provision of the protections of a judicial trial” (Nixon v. [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 2:25 am
Koh's FTC v. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 11:11 pm
Co. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 3:05 pm
The industry is worth $1 billion on an adjusted basis and it would have been worth $21 billion [if nothing else had changed but we extrapolated growth from the highest-growth period of the industry and people still bought records and didn’t play video games]. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 1:41 pm
The Q is not how to fix a broken whackamole system but how do platforms discharge their duties based on the risk they introduce, not one size fits all [just two sizes, I guess].Stan Adams Center for Democracy & Technology: Directive provisions are fundamentally problematic and unbalanced v. 512. [read post]
