Search for: "Low v. Austin"
Results 41 - 60
of 245
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Dec 2022, 9:01 pm
This is a fifty-year low point, down from the 80% who favored it in 1994. [read post]
3 Dec 2023, 9:01 pm
In Alabama v. [read post]
4 May 2019, 12:39 pm
Or is it merely another instance of sloppy treatment of a consumer debt case that is considered a low priority given the small amount in controversy, compared to tort and business-vs-business cases? [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 8:00 am
Bartholomew v. [read post]
23 Feb 2018, 11:45 am
In 2017, the ACLU and the law firm of Covington & Burling filed Collins v. [read post]
21 May 2024, 9:01 pm
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
11 Jul 2024, 9:01 pm
Board of Education and Miranda v. [read post]
SYNTHETIC DRUG BUSTS: FEDERAL ARRESTS FOR FAKE POT AND DESIGNER DRUGS THAT ARE LEGAL UNDER STATE LAW
31 May 2014, 1:34 pm
Under the CSA, there are five classification schedules (Schedules I – V) for their regulation, with Schedule I being the most restrictive and Schedule V the least. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 11:30 am
Murphy v. [read post]
19 May 2017, 12:23 pm
-Austin Sept. 1, 2016, no pet. h.) [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:27 am
In last week’s Fisher v. [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 9:01 pm
It is asking the Court to overturn the Supreme Court’s 1984 landmark decision in Chevron v. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:00 pm
Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. [read post]
6 Feb 2022, 9:01 pm
Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:45 am
See NCAA v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 6:00 pm
Austin Constr. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 6:51 am
Further, the longer low-risk defendants were held, the more likely they were to reoffend. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 1:27 pm
Bailey v. [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 1:00 pm
Rao: especially when percentages are low, ratios are likely to do better. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 7:13 am
In addition to its clear and explicit articulation of the need to rule out random and systematic error before proceeding to a consideration of Sir Austin’s nine guidelines, Sir Richard Doll’s 2002 essay is instructive for judges and lawyers, for other reasons. [read post]