Search for: "People v. Wells" Results 8841 - 8860 of 30,593
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jan 2019, 2:30 am by Tinker Ready
“How many cases of innocent people being wrongly convicted have to occur before people realize that there’s a very broad spectrum of forensic science? [read post]
20 Jan 2019, 6:16 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The Ninth Circuit’s January 15, 2019 opinion in Robles v. [read post]
19 Jan 2019, 4:20 am by SHG
Well, no, that’s not the logical extreme at all. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 1:05 pm by John K. Ross
Fire breaks out at Tucson, Ariz. hotel in 1972, killing 29 people. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Accordingly, the Appellate Division declined to dismiss the appeal on the ground of mootness.* Subsequently redesignated the Office for People with Developmental Disabilities** Such physicians were continued in employment and were given a period of time during which they could seek to obtain a New York State license to practice medicine. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Accordingly, the Appellate Division declined to dismiss the appeal on the ground of mootness.* Subsequently redesignated the Office for People with Developmental Disabilities** Such physicians were continued in employment and were given a period of time during which they could seek to obtain a New York State license to practice medicine. [read post]
16 Jan 2019, 1:50 pm by Eugene Volokh
Circuit has held the question open as well, Pearson v. [read post]
16 Jan 2019, 12:05 pm by Ilya Somin
" The answer, as Francisco tried to explain, but not as well as he perhaps could have, is that a big part of the purpose making the Bill of Rights (including the Takings) applicable against state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment was to ensure that people whose rights were violated by states could go to federal court to vindicate them. [read post]
A Response to Masterpiece Cakeshop In the case before the Supreme Court, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. [read post]