Search for: "In the Interest of Jane Doe" Results 741 - 760 of 1,371
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Mar 2015, 4:55 pm by Bill Otis
 It's mostly a survey of statistics.The most noteworthy feature of the piece is what it does not talk about. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 4:35 am by SHG
What interest do Joseph and Richards have in this morass? [read post]
28 Feb 2015, 8:23 am by Michael Lumer
John and Jane Does, the Second Circuit next addressed the case of Matthews v. [read post]
28 Feb 2015, 8:23 am by Michael Lumer
John and Jane Does, the Second Circuit next addressed the case of Matthews v. [read post]
28 Feb 2015, 7:00 am by Sebastian Brady
Jane used as a jumping-off point Citizenfour, the documentary following the story of the Intercept’s most famous leak that won the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature last Sunday. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 8:34 am by Michael Lumer
John and Jane Does, the plaintiffs were OWS demonstrators who marched onto the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 8:34 am by Michael Lumer
John and Jane Does, the plaintiffs were OWS demonstrators who marched onto the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 12:24 pm
 The Court of Appeal uses "Jane Doe" and initials, whereas the more robust newspaper story uses actual names. [read post]
14 Feb 2015, 6:55 am by Sebastian Brady
The AUMF does include some language meant to define how the military must engage in the conflict, however, specifically by prohibiting “enduring offensive” ground operations. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 11:00 am by Benjamin Wittes
Right now, we have no good answer to the problem of what to do about future long-term detainees—except to hope it does not arise. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 5:00 am by Michael Risch
maybe not as much) and to a random sample of twitter users (do professors tweet different information than Katy Perry or Jane Doe? [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 7:38 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The right to travel is an interesting legal theory that does not actually appear in the Constitution; the Supreme Court says it's an implied right. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 5:16 am by Jon Hyman
The most interesting testimony was provided by Jane Kow, of HR Law Consultants, who spoke about the impact of harassment on the modern workplace. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 12:10 pm by Tom Smith
” via www.washingtonpost.com My brother in law, Paul Cassell, is one of the attorneys representing the Jane Doe #3 who made these allegations. [read post]