Search for: "People v. Andrews"
Results 761 - 780
of 1,931
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Sep 2009, 10:39 am
People on a bus who were misbehaving as the bus passed through a council estate would, for example, not be caught by s.153A; bricks put through a window of an owner-occupied property would not be caught unless the perpetrator was a tenant; (c) this narrow definition made sense because, in any other factual situation, the council could (and should) seek an ASBO instead – see Birmingham City Council v Shafi and Ellis [2008] EWCA 1186 (our note here). [read post]
5 Apr 2019, 6:00 am
A decade ago, two esteemed scholars of judicial behavior, Lee Epstein and Andrew D. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 4:04 pm
Justice Allan stated this to be the case in Andrews v TVNZ [2006] NZHC 1586, a case which involved the broadcast of detailed footage of a couple being extricated from a car wreck. [read post]
31 Dec 2020, 6:29 pm
Term Limits v. [read post]
8 Dec 2020, 1:01 pm
The proposed registry is “another example of [the Trump Administration] trying to extort the State of New York to get information that they can use at the Department of Homeland Security and ICE that they’ll use to deport people,” said New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 8:29 am
He decided in People v. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 9:55 pm
See, Murdza v. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 3:15 pm
Ammons v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 8:06 pm
Francis v. [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 7:13 am
At the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (subscription required), Daniel Cotter looks to past precedent in U.S. v. [read post]
22 May 2016, 4:05 pm
Davies doorstepped convicted fraudster Neelam Desai once and sent her two emails over claims she had conned people out of thousands of pounds. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 10:03 am
Webster and Andrew J. [read post]
14 Sep 2019, 7:38 am
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Elhady v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 10:51 am
Department of State’s Nov. 17 filing in Cengiz et al v. bin Salman et al stating that the department recognizes Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s sovereign immunity as a sitting head of state. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 2:33 pm
It hasnothing to do with the story.State v. [read post]
14 Jun 2020, 12:26 pm
Likewise, although Graham announced that the subpoenas are necessary because "[t]he American people deserve answers to these questions" about "why all these counterintelligence investigations were opened to begin with" and "how these investigations got off the rails," a recent Office of Legal Counsel opinion insists that "transmitting information “to inform the public . . . is not a part of the legislative function. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 8:22 am
State v. [read post]
15 Jul 2018, 4:41 pm
Except the wrong door.Lillie v. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 2:33 pm
It hasnothing to do with the story.State v. [read post]
4 May 2014, 10:13 am
Coburn v. [read post]
