Search for: "Dan Markel" Results 781 - 800 of 929
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jul 2010, 10:36 am
We previously blogged about the Senate's recent approval of a measure to prevent corporations from taking tax deductions for punitive damages awards.Law Professors Gregg Polsky and Dan Markel criticize that proposal in a New York Times op-ed entitled "Damages Control. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 9:52 am by Usha Rodrigues
  I'll be teaming up with Dan Markel, Larry Solum, and Dave Fagundes for the blogging panel. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 11:24 am
And Dan Markel has an essay entitled "A Judge for Justice" (via "Legal Theory Blog"). [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 2:45 pm
[Res ipsa loquitur / Jonathan Turley] * Carolyn Elefant and Dan Markel opine upon our recent Facebook woes. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 2:50 pm by Dan Filler
  I feel certain that, if Dan Markel were still with us, he'd note that Dean Guzman received his degree in Canada, from the University of Toronto. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 10:32 am
In the blogosphere, Doug Berman of Sentencing Law and Policy has several quick posts about the case here, Dan Markel at PrawfsBlawg has commentary here, and at Volokh, Orin Kerr has a brief reaction to the decision here. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 10:55 pm
Rev. 1147 (with Dan Markel & Ethan Leib) [read post]
10 Mar 2007, 12:35 pm
In keeping with my promise to Dan Markel to write at least some stuff about economics and policy, I mention Easterbrook's column for two reasons. [read post]
4 Apr 2007, 9:11 pm
This will be my last post for a while; thanks to Dan Markel and the PrawfsBlawg family for giving me the opportunity to blog here; it has been a pleasure. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 7:20 am by John Steele
(Related issue: Dan Markel, at Prawfsblawg, asks whether second degree murder was an appropriate charge.) [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 7:47 am by Usha Rodrigues
 Dan Markel will be there, as will Dave Fagundes and Lesley Wexler. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 3:13 am by News
Greenfield believes the Supreme Court has it wrong, saying the founding fathers “…said ‘twice’ not ‘thrice’…not as many times as needed to get a conviction…” Greenfield also comments on Dan Markel’s and Ethan Leib’s recent entry in Slate’s “Fix the Constitution” series, where they write“…our constitutional protections against double jeopardy are anemic. [read post]
13 Dec 2006, 7:28 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Dan Markel reacts to Chemerinsky's piece here. [read post]
30 May 2007, 9:03 am
I'd like to thank Dan Markel for inviting me to guest-blog here, as well as the rest of the PB crew for tolerating me all this time. [read post]