Search for: "Justice v. Justice" Results 61 - 80 of 88,300
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Apr 2016, 6:22 am by Immigration Prof
In this piece on Immigration Impact, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia analyzes Justice Anthony Kennedy's "upside down" argument at the oral argument in United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 3:06 am
Regina (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice Court of Appeal "A convicted person seeking compensation after the reversal of his conviction on the basis of new or newly discovered facts establishing beyond reasonable doubt that there was a miscarriage of justice had to show that the facts were unknown to him during the trial or appeal. [read post]
14 Jan 2013, 7:02 pm by Tom Goldstein
On the Supreme Court front, the chatter has been over the sentence Justice Thomas interjected during today’s oral argument in Boyer v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 11:26 am by annalthouse@gmail.com (Ann Althouse)
... says he would have joined Justice Alito's "powerful dissent" in Snyder v. [read post]
7 May 2014, 4:50 pm by Harold O'Grady
Bennett Capers has posted  Reading Michigan v. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 9:16 am by clairesg
The judiciary Geoffrey Stone discusses Justice Thomas’ call to overturn New York Times v. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 11:03 am by willcanderson
Daniel Hemel Analyzes Justice Gorsuch's Opinion in Rodriguez v FDIC SCOTUSblog [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 3:08 am by michael
Regina (Oakes) v Secretary of State for Justice and others [2010] EWCA Civ 1169; [2010] WLR(D) 267 “The different wording of the tests to be applied when considering the suitability for automatic release of a prisoner who had been recalled to prison for breaching the terms of his licence, under ss 255A(5) and 255C(3) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (as inserted by section 29(2) of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008) was deliberate. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 3:11 am by sally
O’Brien v Ministry of Justice (Case C-393/10); [2012] WLR (D) 58 “It was for the member states to define the concept of ‘workers who have an employment contract or an employment relationship’ within the meaning of clause 2.1 of the Framework Agreement on part-time work, provided that this did not lead to arbitrary exclusion from protection offered by Directive 97/81/EC.” WLR Daily, 1st March 2012 Source: www.iclr.co.uk [read post]