Search for: "DAVID MORRIS v. THE STATE"
Results 41 - 60
of 252
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Nov 2021, 12:59 pm
Michael Kimberly argues for respondent David Wilson. [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 4:00 am
As David Taras argues, media coverage is vital for informing the citizenry about how courts decide cases. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 3:30 pm
Crawford v. [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 6:09 am
State v. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 5:01 am
Ron DeSantis and a panel of scientists were discussing COVID, because it "contradicts the consensus of local and global health authorities regarding the efficacy of masks to prevent the spread of Covid-19″—the scientists apparently stated that children should not wear masks, and the CDC calls for children age 2 and above to wear masks.[57] But as recently as August 2020 the World Health Organization took a different view for 2-to-5-year-olds (which it said shouldn't… [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 12:22 pm
• Roger V. [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 12:22 pm
• Roger V. [read post]
27 Apr 2021, 7:30 am
Stephens, David S. [read post]
18 Mar 2021, 3:50 am
With the use of “(cleaned up)” in the recent Brownback v. [read post]
8 Mar 2021, 4:17 pm
DAVID L. [read post]
7 Mar 2021, 4:34 pm
On 3 March 2021 Morris J handed down judgment in the privacy injunction case of COS v PER [2021] EWHC 475 (QB). [read post]
25 Dec 2020, 11:17 am
Burnham, a Professor of History at The Ohio State, wrote a scathing letter to the Lancet’s editors, as well as opinion pieces in History News Network.[7] David Rothman, a professor at Columbia University, similarly took Proctor to task for his pretensions of doing “history” while testifying for the lawsuit industry.[8] Perhaps the most telling rebuttal came from Professor Alan Blum, a physician and anti-tobacco activist. [read post]
25 Dec 2020, 11:17 am
Burnham, a Professor of History at The Ohio State, wrote a scathing letter to the Lancet’s editors, as well as opinion pieces in History News Network.[7] David Rothman, a professor at Columbia University, similarly took Proctor to task for his pretensions of doing “history” while testifying for the lawsuit industry.[8] Perhaps the most telling rebuttal came from Professor Alan Blum, a physician and anti-tobacco activist. [read post]
20 Dec 2020, 8:43 am
Robert Chesney and Steve Vladeck shared an episode of the National Security Law Podcast about the latest developments in the TikTok lawsuit and the Justice Department and the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
24 Nov 2020, 2:55 am
Key Findings: Excessive tax rates on cigarettes in some states induce substantial black and gray market movement of tobacco products into high-tax states from low-tax states or foreign sources. [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 12:05 pm
PAUL DAVID SJOGREN, Appellant, v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 8:03 am
In past posts,[1] I have called attention to a project launched by historian David K. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 12:40 pm
Christopher’s article Whack-a-Mole: Why Prosecuting Digital Currency Exchanges Won’t Stop Online Laundering is cited in the following article: David D. [read post]
29 May 2020, 5:02 am
And in David v. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 9:05 pm
David R. [read post]
