Search for: "State v. Mai" Results 541 - 560 of 132,838
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jun 2024, 12:43 am by Rose Hughes
Notably, § 112, r 6 does not state that the Specification must also describe equivalents of that structure. [read post]
9 Jun 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
On February 23, 2024, the Delaware Court of Chancery issued its decision in West Palm Beach Firefighters’ Pension Fund v. [read post]
9 Jun 2024, 5:17 pm by Yosi Yahoudai
Rahimi’s lawyers say a Supreme Court decision two years ago in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
9 Jun 2024, 9:40 am by Giles Peaker
The review decision in part stated I refer to R v Oxford CC ex p Doyle (1997) concluding that a Child Arrangement Order does not mean the Children are reasonably expected to live with both parents. [read post]
9 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Lawrence Solum
The law talks about rights, and duties, and malice, and intent, and negligence, and so forth, and nothing is easier, or, I may say, more common in legal reasoning, than to take these words in their moral sense, at some state of the argument, and so to drop into fallacy. [read post]
8 Jun 2024, 5:20 pm by Bill Marler
For example, produce has, since at least 1991, been the source of substantial numbers of outbreak-related E. coli O157:H7 infections.[27] Other unusual vehicles for E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks have included unpasteurized juices, yogurt, dried salami, mayonnaise, raw milk, game meats, sprouts, and raw cookie dough.[28] According to a recent study, an estimated 93,094 illnesses are due to domestically acquired E. coli O157:H7 each year in the United… [read post]
8 Jun 2024, 8:33 am by familoo
‘Now is the time to reassess presumption of parental involvement’, writes Lea Levine in the April issue of the journal[1]. [read post]
7 Jun 2024, 10:12 am by Katitza Rodriguez
Domestic Spying Powers and Domestic Safeguards The Convention grants extensive domestic surveillance powers to gather evidence for any crime, accompanied by minimal and insufficient safeguards, many of which do not even apply to its chapter on cross-border surveillance (Chapter V). [read post]