Search for: "Harper v. State" Results 861 - 880 of 956
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Oct 2006, 12:15 am
As Kevin Baker argued in the June 2006 issue of Harper's, key figures in the present Bush administration are linked to efforts to argue that the failure of the United States in Vietnam during the Nixon and Ford Administrations is attributable to a "sell out" by forces in the United States which opposed the war; Baker cites several other uses of this line of argument in American politics in the end of World War II and during the Korean War. [read post]
29 Jan 2012, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
There are no adjudicated PCC complaints to report but resolved complaints include: Sally Low v The Independent, Clause 1, 27/01/2012; Mr Syed Ahmad v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 26/01/2012; Mr Colin Philip v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 26/01/2012; David Bret v The Sun, Clause 1, 26/01/2012; Mr Damien Collis v The Daily Telegraph, Clause 1, 26/01/2012, Mr Peter Reynolds v Lancashire Telegraph, Clause 1, 26/01/2012 Karen Birch v Oldham Evening… [read post]
16 Apr 2018, 4:11 am by Rebecca Tushnet
INS: speech the state can’t regulate—how far are we from having no distinction b/t commercial and noncommercial speech? [read post]
31 Dec 2010, 11:59 pm by Transplanted Lawyer
  Watch for the decision in McDonald v. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 10:41 pm by Jeff Gamso
 She had a strategic plan, modeled on how Thurgood Marshall went after racial discrimination leading to Brown v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 6:39 am by mmoreland
Following New York Times Co. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2023, 3:30 pm by Matt Miller, Registered Patent Attorney
The textbook case on this issue is Harper & Row v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 8:14 am by Legal Beagle
As a party litigant without representation, Mr Wilson was, according to court observers, forced abroad to Japan and the United States for supportive expert medical reports. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 4:00 am by Administrator
”[72] Justice L’Heureux-Dubé, however, did not agree that an expression stated in the positive (i.e., a “significant contributing cause”) meant the same thing as one stated in the negative (i.e., “not a trivial cause”). [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 10:03 am by Eric Goldman
Q10: In the famous copyright fair use case of Harper & Row v. [read post]