Search for: "Head v State" Results 8261 - 8280 of 14,434
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Apr 2008, 10:39 am
Doing what we do best, here's a head start - some more cases we've found on judicial notice of FDA records. [read post]
28 Apr 2013, 10:39 pm by Shouvik Kumar Guha
T-Series’ arguments against both these provisions can be classified under the two broad headings of natural justice and unconstitutionality (being violative of Arts. 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300A). [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 2:49 pm
United States, 444 U. [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 5:50 am by SHG
At Techdirt, Tim Cushing explains decision in United States v. $167,070 in United States Currency: It begins with the flimsiest of “reasonable suspicion” and heads downhill after that. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 12:29 pm by Steve Vladeck
In contrast, the Justice Department during the eight years of the Obama administration sought extraordinary relief from the court exactly once — a petition for certiorari before judgment in United States v. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 9:07 am by CAPTAIN
  Today, after spending more than 32 years on Death Row, Larry Eugene Mann may actually meet his maker.Printed below is the biography of the State v. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 3:09 pm by Lyle Denniston
The Louisiana couples’ lawyers, in urging the Supreme Court to take on their case now along with any of those it accepted from the Sixth Circuit, made four points in favor of early review of the Louisiana case: First, the judge’s decision in favor of the ban was the first in the nation to uphold a state ban in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 3:03 pm by Cannabis Law Group
Wherever you fly from is where you’re screened by security, so no matter how legal it is where you’re headed, it’s the laws in your departure state that probably deserve the most consideration. [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 1:51 pm
Defendant International asserts that plaintiffs Labor Law § 240 (1) claim must be dismissed as against it, as plaintiff's own negligent actions in not wearing his safety harness, despite being told by his employer that he had to be tied off in order to work, as the sole proximate cause of his head injuries. [read post]