Search for: "State v. Record"
Results 7661 - 7680
of 43,411
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Aug 2010, 6:04 am
Radley Balko interviewed Joseph Cassilly, Harford County, Maryland state’s attorney, for his article at Reason about the handful of states that contend that it's a crime to record police in the performance of their duty. [read post]
4 Jun 2009, 3:44 am
Examining Judge Sotomayor's criminal justice record [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 2:44 pm
Hertz Corp. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2024, 5:50 am
In the Gambia v. [read post]
19 Aug 2024, 6:00 am
Teddy Bear Co. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 10:07 am
NSAFirst Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. [read post]
17 Jul 2015, 2:53 pm
D was engaged in a Housing Court action in Bronx County, entitled XX Realty v Hanagan, defendant's counsel personally reviewed the records of the Bronx County Civil Court and found no Index Number and/or case matching the case of XX Realty v H. [read post]
19 Aug 2024, 6:00 am
Teddy Bear Co. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2020, 12:41 pm
Collection Development, LLC v. [read post]
5 Apr 2013, 12:00 am
V. [read post]
5 May 2022, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court in its 2019 Rucho v. [read post]
14 Jun 2007, 5:47 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 12:58 pm
Weber (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act)* State Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/currentstate.htmIn re Melaya F. [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 1:45 pm
The Office of the California Secretary of State has issued a set of proposed emergency regulations for post-election manual tallying of paper election records. [read post]
5 Mar 2011, 1:30 am
Michelle Davis won in State v. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 5:02 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 9:20 am
And speaking of Judge Trott, do NOT miss his concurring opinion in Alexander v. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 10:46 am
This means that they provided an organised directory of content which users could search and browse and from which they could select and unlawfully download the sound recordings or other content of their choice.The judge found that the websites infringed copyright on three grounds: (1) by communicating copyright-protected works to the public; (2) by authorising infringements by UK users; (3) by acting as joint tortfeasors with UK users.Arnold J ordered the defendants to block… [read post]