Search for: "Commonwealth v. Stephens, S." Results 41 - 60 of 211
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Apr 2019, 11:13 am by Coleman Saunders
Nathaniel Sobel analyzed the recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case Commonwealth v. [read post]
20 May 2012, 6:09 am by Rosalind English
Recent cases concerning defence powers have been based, not on the ambit of the  ”forbidden area” ( Marchiori v Environment Agency [2002]), but on the notion that the government’s discretion in such matters is much wider (CND v Prime Minister [2002]; or that courts should be reticent (rather than constitutionally forbidden) to intervene (R v Jones [2006]). [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 5:00 am
(It is noted that Attorney Stephen T. [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 1:45 pm by Maura Greene
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in an August decision rendered in Global Naps, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2017, 8:04 am by Eugene Volokh
An interesting question now pending before the Massachusetts high court in Commonwealth v. [read post]
30 Jan 2007, 9:41 am
" So what's happening in the Commonwealth. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 5:27 am by Eugene Volokh
" The Court also found the Commonwealth's record of prior disruptive conduct purportedly justifying the buffer zones to be woefully deficient, as was the Commonwealth's record of having tried, without success, other means of addressing the problems that threatened its interests. [read post]
14 Sep 2008, 7:56 pm
Plaintiffs, Kentucky Waterways Alliance, Sierra Club Cumberland Chapter, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, and Floyds Fork Environmental Association, appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants, Stephen L. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 6:42 pm by Stephen Page
”[2] G v H (1994) A good starting point in discussing the issue of who is a parent is G v. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 6:42 pm by Stephen Page
”[2] G v H (1994) A good starting point in discussing the issue of who is a parent is G v. [read post]
14 Feb 2019, 4:46 pm by INFORRM
The EFF argued that the embedding of Section 230 into NAFTA/USMCA “could help roll back the precedent set in the Google v. [read post]