Search for: "State v. D. Knox" Results 41 - 60 of 91
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Apr 2019, 3:46 am by Edith Roberts
” This blog’s analysis of Tuesday’s argument in North Carolina Dept of Revenue v. [read post]
4 May 2012, 7:31 am by Robert Chesney
Gottlieb notified Agent Azad and Assistant United States Attorney Jeffrey Knox that he was representing defendant and asked that his client not be interviewed unless he was present. [read post]
24 Mar 2024, 6:50 pm
The Court concluded there were extensive human rights violations and ordered the State to provide specialized medical assistance to the victims, pay compensation for both material losses and pain and suffering, and publicly acknowledge its wrongdoing. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 2:00 pm by John Elwood
  Harris appears to be on hold for Knox v. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 6:31 am by Conor McEvily
The second case in which the Court heard oral argument yesterday was Knox v. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 9:55 pm
  More recently, at the March 2018 meeting of the Human Rights Council, John Knox, the Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, will present the "Report on Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment" along with reports on the human right to a healthy environment, children's rights and the environment, and reports on country visits (discussed here). [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 8:55 am by Marty Lederman
  As Justice Alito recently wrote for the Court in Knox v. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 2:57 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Here, the SEC instituted proceedings against Tilton and her Patriarch Partners firms in March of 2015, alleging that she and her firms hid the poor performance of the companies that she’d invested in. [read post]
6 May 2011, 3:46 pm by Jon L. Gelman
” Although the Sherman Anti-trust Act had been passed in 1890, the United States Supreme Court decision of U.S. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2007, 7:56 am
State of Indiana and the Knox County Police Department (NFP) - Reversed. [read post]
19 Jun 2015, 12:13 pm by John Elwood
It asks whether “the Fourth Circuit contravene[d] § 2254 (d)(1) when it granted habeas relief on the ground that the North Carolina state courts unreasonably applied ‘clearly established’ law when they held that third-party religious discussions with jurors did not concern ‘the matter[s] pending before the jury[.] [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 1:08 pm by John Elwood
United States, 14-419, before it), Umaña v. [read post]