Search for: "Bounds v. State"
Results 7441 - 7460
of 9,710
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2011, 11:05 am
The irony in relying on Jones v. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 12:21 pm
Justice Aftab AlamIn a recent decision, the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v M/s Ark Builders Pvt. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 11:35 am
After US v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 9:26 pm
United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 9:19 am
In its order, in identifying the parameters it utilized to resolve the parents’ school placement dispute, the trial court stated that “education is by its nature an exploration and examination of new things,” and that “a child requires academic, social, cultural, and physical interaction with a variety of experiences, people, concepts, and surroundings in order to grow to an adult who can make intelligent decisions about how to achieve a productive and satisfying… [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 1:27 am
Judge Polster reviewed the long history of qui tam actions in the United States, and noted that the Supreme Court, in Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 12:31 am
While it is true that this "court is not bound by the PTO's actions and must make its own independent determination of patent validity," Medrad, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 6:00 pm
This devolution jurisdiction was first exercised by the Privy Council to rule on allegations of Convention rights violations by the prosecution in both solemn procedure (Montgomery v HMA 2001 SC (PC) 1, 19 October 2000) and summary criminal procedure (Brown v Stott 2001 SC (PC) 43, 5 December 2000). [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 3:25 pm
SG and 35 state AGs have weighed in claiming that data mining does not merit First Amendment protection. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm
" The decision states further, ". . [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 8:52 am
” The case, First National Mortgage Company v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 6:55 am
Here I take no position on whether recent protect-the-speech-we-hate decisions like United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:56 am
As to the non-congruent species -->[0048]Without intending to be bound by any theory it is believed that non-congruent flavor volatiles alter the neurological taste bud signaling that occurs in the presence of a HIS, thereby improving the perceived taste of the HIS. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 3:00 am
Co. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 3:50 pm
(Elsner v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 10:40 am
Sorrel v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 10:39 am
In Abraxis v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 9:00 am
In other words, counsel in both states appear to have been of the same mind. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 8:21 am
The petition of the day is: Title: North Carolina v. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 6:44 am
The case, Brule v. [read post]
