Search for: "People v. Grant" Results 8081 - 8100 of 16,996
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 May 2009, 8:05 pm by Matt Cameron
But I have to say a few things about the First Circuit’s thoughtful and eminently humane ruling in Taing v. [read post]
22 Apr 2008, 10:27 am
 However, in the case of Committee to Save the Hollywoodland Specific Plan and Hollywood Heritage v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 7:30 am by W.F. Casey Ebsary, Jr.
(See Dkt. 8 at B. 338) the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s request for habeas relief (Dkt. 1), and finds that FLA. [read post]
25 May 2012, 4:41 am by Daniel Richardson
By Daniel RichardsonCity of Montpelier v. [read post]
26 May 2015, 7:42 am
  In Mills, the plaintiff claimed that, due to a variant gene (“CYP”), she could not metabolize the defendant’s drug as well as most other people. [read post]
25 Jun 2017, 1:56 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
We meant what we said, when we described in R. v. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 5:52 am by Richard Hunt
The Court concluded that it could not grant summary judgment with respect to the remedy for non-compliance because there was no evidence establishing as a matter of law that WCAG 2.0 at any success level is what the ADA requires. [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 2:42 pm
  The Zhenli Ye Gon prosecution is a perfect example.In United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 10:05 am by South Florida Lawyers
However, it strikes us that this action is uncharacteristic of the “Government of the People, by the People and For the People,” famously envisioned by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address over 140 years ago.Oy.Judge Cortinas, however, sees it a bit differently:Given the importance of this potentially admissible evidence to appellant’s case, the trial court erred by granting Wackenhut’s motion precluding the introduction of the FBI… [read post]
19 Mar 2023, 12:56 pm by Giles Peaker
As famously expressed by Knight Bruce V-C in Walter v Selfe (1851) 4 De G & Sm 315, 322, the question is whether the interference ought to be considered a material inconvenience “not merely according to elegant or dainty modes and habits of living, but according to plain and sober and simple notions among the English people”; see also Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd (2013) QB 455, para 36(ii). [read post]