Search for: "State v. Eager" Results 741 - 760 of 1,122
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2012, 3:25 pm by Lovechilde
Of course, Blatty’s heyday of feeding sexist garbage to eager audiences was nearly 40 years ago. [read post]
21 May 2012, 9:43 am by Ilya Somin
In the lawsuit titled United States of America v. 434 Main Street, Tewksbury, Massachusetts, the government is suing an inanimate object, the motel Caswell’s father built in 1955. [read post]
19 May 2012, 7:53 am by Paul Jacobson
It is shocking as well that some media houses find this distasteful work worth displaying on their websites and are eager to publish it repeatedly. [read post]
15 May 2012, 2:09 pm by Ariel Katz
The complaint alleged “systematic, widespread, and unauthorized copying and distribution of a vast amount of copyrighted works”, and argued that GSU “has facilitated, enabled, encouraged, and induced Georgia State professors to upload and post to these systems - and Georgia State students simultaneously to download, view, print, copy, and distribute - many, if not all, of the assigned readings for a particular course without limitation. [read post]
14 May 2012, 8:24 am by Schachtman
A few expert witnesses, eager to avoid being locked in as either a “plaintiff’s” or a “defendant’s” expert witness, with perhaps some damage to their professional reputations, balanced their views in a way to avoid being classified as working exclusively for one side or the other. [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]
1 May 2012, 11:32 am by Michelle Yeary
  Having sat on the cases for months, courts around the country are eager to move forward. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 4:10 am by Russ Bensing
  That was followed by the ruling in State v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 1:00 pm by Steve Hall
  And: Weeks’s ruling—the first invocation of the new Racial Justice Act—was the first step in repairing the damage done by one of the Supreme Court’s most notorious holdings: McCleskey v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 8:20 am by Shima Baradaran
A concise, well-written introductionthat clearly states why the article is an important contribution always catchesmy attention. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 4:04 pm by Howard Knopf
Moreover, the kind of information that the AUCC agreed to provide is highly valuable data that many publishers would be eager to get, but that in a competitive market most users don’t easily divulge. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 6:01 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  (I’m not sure this is true, as a property teacher who recently taught State v. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 4:02 am by Philip Thomas
Last year I wrote in this post about the Mississippi Supreme Court's decision in Merchant v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 9:52 pm by Nicole Huberfeld
  The states are, after all, asking the Court to ‘fashion’ doctrine for them. [read post]