Search for: "Roll v. Roll"
Results 6121 - 6140
of 6,812
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jul 2009, 9:56 am
(The case is Electronic Data Sys Corp v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 9:40 am
Bennis v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 1:31 am
Finding the instruction highly prejudicial, the Court, in State v. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 9:54 pm
King v. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 2:37 pm
v=fwvv5IyPkXM&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch? [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 2:05 pm
Now, day two of the Sotomayor hearings is just about complete, with the post mortems from this morning's session rolling in. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 3:54 am
(3) Data retention remains doubtful in terms of fundamental rights compliance: in the ECHR, S & Marper v UK questions mass monitoring of the unconvicted, Copland v UK reiterates that traffic data is covered by Article 8 (as I argue here); the German courts are considering various challenges (summarised by Digital Rights Ireland: 1 | 2), and DRI itself is engaged in a challenge to the Directive. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 9:25 pm
The case cite is Sportsfragrance, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 3:07 pm
(3) Data retention remains doubtful in terms of fundamental rights compliance: in the ECHR, S & Marper v UK questions mass monitoring of the unconvicted, Copland v UK reiterates that traffic data is covered by Article 8 (as I argue here); the German courts are considering various challenges (summarised by Digital Rights Ireland: 1 | 2), and DRI itself is engaged in a challenge to the Directive. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 8:12 am
And (wait for it) ... segue to Brown v. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 12:30 pm
The borrower is charged new fees each time the same loan is extended or “rolled over. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 12:25 pm
’ This one may not have the Sun King exactly rolling in his grave. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 11:05 am
It also reversed in People v. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 11:03 am
Case 4: State of California v. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 9:57 am
But I'm also incredibly disturbed by the willingness of the California judiciary to find "exigent circumstances" in any setting in which you don't roll off your chair laughing at the suggesting that someone might perhaps, just maybe, in a parallel universe be alive and waiting desperately to be found in whatever area the police happen to want to search. [read post]
5 Jul 2009, 2:28 am
Their only available alternative was to beg for the privilege to continue to sell Windows XP.See the IPBiz post Google v. [read post]
4 Jul 2009, 7:25 pm
After getting a chance to actually read the majority and dissenting opinions in Cumo v. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 7:43 am
In Lusby v. [read post]
30 Jun 2009, 7:12 pm
Second, her property rights ruling in Didden v. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 7:04 pm
FEC and Austin v. [read post]
