Search for: "People v. Tooks" Results 8741 - 8760 of 12,220
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jan 2016, 11:12 am by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
” 11We believe the civil union law created a burdensome and flawedstatutory scheme that fails to afford same-sex couples the samerights and remedies provided to heterosexual married couples asrequired … by the New Jersey Supreme Court and its landmarkLewis v. [read post]
13 Mar 2015, 12:50 am by Ben Reeve-Lewis
So maybe this is simply a convoluted way of getting people to eat the problem rather than face lengthy court proceedings. [read post]
29 Feb 2020, 4:02 am by SHG
In the 1968 case Pickering v. [read post]
14 Feb 2008, 7:32 pm
The more deferential standard of judicial review afforded to foreign awards and foreign-related awards is based on Article V(1) of the New York Convention.[18] With regard to the enforcement of awards, the Supreme People's Court took steps to avoid the local protectionism by setting up a reporting system to monitor the lower courts' refusals to enforce foreign arbitral awards.[19] In general, the Chinese commercial arbitration system is in conformity with the… [read post]
17 May 2024, 9:05 pm by Tyler Hoguet
Schweber and Anderson explain that under the test established in Brandenburg v. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 12:30 pm by John Ross
Regular readers of Short Circuit will remember that the Fifth Circuit made quite a stir when it held, in Jarkesy v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 3:17 am by SHG
  Wrong IDs convicted innocent people. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 10:01 pm by Ken
In Aggravation: V. snarky assholes. [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 7:18 am by Joy Waltemath
Using Reference Search, employers can find people with whom an applicant may have worked previously. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 1:41 pm by WIMS
      At the press conference, President Obama said, "When I took office, I pledged to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 7:21 am by Eduardo Penalver
"  I understand what she is saying as a legal matter -- thanks to Employment Division v. [read post]