Search for: "People v. Good (1990)" Results 521 - 540 of 1,298
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Mar 2017, 4:41 pm by Alyson Poole (AU)
In December last year, Jordan secured a partial victory: the People’s Supreme Court in China ruled that 乔丹 was primarily associated with Jordan the person, not the company, and cancelled these marks. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 4:00 am by Malcolm Mercer
Overall, the number of practising lawyers increased by 561 lawyers[xiv] or 2.3% annually during the 1990s. [read post]
15 Mar 2017, 4:28 pm by Josh Blackman
A fitting starting point is a case many lawyers are familiar with: Rector, Etc. of Holy Trinity Church v. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 12:24 pm by Paul Kish
With crimes rates on the rise, Congress in 1968 added this law with the obvious idea of both trying to heavily punish and possibly deter people who feel it is a good idea to bring a gun to a crime. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 12:24 pm by Paul Kish
With crimes rates on the rise, Congress in 1968 added this law with the obvious idea of both trying to heavily punish and possibly deter people who feel it is a good idea to bring a gun to a crime. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 12:24 pm by Paul Kish
With crimes rates on the rise, Congress in 1968 added this law with the obvious idea of both trying to heavily punish and possibly deter people who feel it is a good idea to bring a gun to a crime. [read post]
7 Feb 2017, 1:25 pm
 The right to counsel, if it exists, protects "bad" people as well as "good ones".But I'm confident Judge Pregerson would nonetheless have appreciated it if the underlying facts in this case were slightly different. [read post]
29 Jan 2017, 5:12 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
Cape Industries Plc., [1990] Ch. 433 (C.A.) [read post]
29 Jan 2017, 12:00 am
By the late 1990s, the conventional wisdom in Washington was that what was good for Wall Street was good for America. [read post]
13 Dec 2016, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
” Otherwise, there would never be an occasion to test whether an old precedent remains good law.Where is the line between permissible test legislation and impermissible defiance of existing precedent for no other reason than harassment of people who want to exercise their rights? [read post]