Search for: "People v. Commons"
Results 7341 - 7360
of 14,148
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Oct 2022, 9:22 am
People v Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015). [read post]
29 Oct 2022, 9:22 am
People v Lockridge, 498 Mich 358 (2015). [read post]
27 Sep 2024, 1:20 pm
In the 19th and early 20th century, scientists and lay people usually conceptualized causation as “deterministic. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 2:58 am
Siemer v. [read post]
13 Apr 2023, 6:39 pm
State v. [read post]
23 Nov 2016, 2:25 am
Mathews v. [read post]
14 Sep 2022, 2:59 pm
Trump v. [read post]
8 May 2015, 9:54 am
See Beck v. [read post]
3 May 2012, 5:19 pm
It is, he said, “one of the only common law decisions of that sort of status which have looked at these issues in this depth”. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 6:21 am
In Banana v. [read post]
29 Oct 2013, 8:20 pm
Notes for: --Marbury v. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 7:17 am
One recent example is Romer v. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 12:13 am
One recent example is Romer v. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 4:09 pm
This overrides the orthodox position at common law (as re-affirmed by the House of Lords in Berezovsky v Michaels [2000] 1 WLR 1004), to the effect that each actionable publication of a defamatory statement constitutes a separate tort which must be considered separately when deciding if the English court has jurisdiction to hear a claim about it. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 9:49 am
(People v. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 6:22 am
This depends on the people—all people—having access to the law. [read post]
30 Aug 2015, 12:37 pm
In Weaver v. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 3:16 pm
McClure v. [read post]
Proposed Michigan Bill Banning Discrimination Based on Hair Texture and Race-based Hairstyles Stalls
14 Sep 2021, 8:56 pm
On appeal, the Court agreed with the dismissal, holding that while dreadlocks were a manner of wearing hair that was common for black people and suitable for black hair texture, they were not an immutable characteristic of black persons. [read post]
30 Mar 2009, 7:23 am
The subsequent amendments (Bill C-2) increased penalties (including mandatory minimum); Smyth argues that materials are circulating while the public desire for ‘justice’ has been satisfied by prosecutions of people like Sharpe, giving examples of R v Chin [2005] AJ No 1712, R v Austin [2006] BCK No 3430 and (missed the last one), and suggesting model legislation that would be more appropriate based on the harm, referring to images that reasonable person… [read post]
