Search for: "People v Mohamed" Results 61 - 80 of 317
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Apr 2015, 1:16 pm by Yishai Schwartz
In a 233-page blockbuster decision, Uri Avnery v. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 4:42 pm by INFORRM
  While words can mean different things to different people, in libel the parties are concerned with finding the single meaning the words complained of bear. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 9:57 am by Emily Dai
” This Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 12:09 pm by Hadley Baker
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, et al. from July 22-26. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 1:10 pm by Rick St. Hilaire
Right after the events of January 2011, the local sheikh incited people to destroy and loot the site of the ancient infidels. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 5:17 am by Blog Editorial
Today’s case, Mohammed & Ors v Ministry of Defence, concerns Serdar Mohammed who was captured in Afghanistan by the British in 2010, held for four months, handed over to the Afghan authorities and convicted as a Taliban commander making roadside bombs. [read post]
19 Dec 2015, 9:57 am by Giles Peaker
” There was apparently no consideration of the Mohammed principles (R (Mohammed) v Camden LBC [1997] 30 HLR 315 – (a) the merits of the substantive case, (b) whether there was new material on review that could effect the decision, (c) the personal circumstances of the applicant.). [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 8:54 am by Rachel Bercovitz
Steve Vladeck outlined his critiques of Justice Kennedy’s analysis of Bivens damages, as set forth in the majority opinion in Ziglar v. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 9:12 pm
Mohamed Foda of Leduc, Alberta, who forced RateMDs to provide information about a negative poster through the California Northern District Court in Foda et al v. [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 9:07 pm
Mohamed Foda of Leduc, Alberta, who forced RateMDs to provide information about a negative poster through the California Northern District Court in Foda et al v. [read post]