Search for: "State v. Minor"
Results 8961 - 8980
of 16,408
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Oct 2015, 9:22 pm
In the 2012 decision in Miller v. [read post]
14 Feb 2022, 5:01 am
And as pointed out in Doe v. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 5:37 am
Even within schools, the speech of younger minors can be regulated in ways that speech of older minors cannot (Cf. [read post]
13 May 2008, 6:00 am
We don't know what that title means; we just wanted to draw some mathematicians to our blog.Well, no.Actually, we just read United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 9:41 am
State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 5:01 am
Bar discipline, mostly secret in many states. [read post]
12 May 2020, 11:20 am
State v. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 11:34 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 10, 2008 US v. [read post]
10 Sep 2018, 9:01 pm
In 1992, in Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 3:13 pm
Wong and United States v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 12:24 pm
Georgia (1977)) and for minor participants in felonies resulting in death (Enmund v. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 6:16 am
While previous center-line violations have been minor in nature and have been conducted with minimal forces—two fighter jets on each occasion—Beijing’s latest actions are no longer just a symbolic expression of displeasure with U.S. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 6:02 am
In Ellithorpe v. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 8:35 pm
United States Jaycees; the Court distinguished Matthews v. [read post]
12 Sep 2021, 3:10 am
On this third point, Mr Justice Birss (as he then was) provided an explanation as to the German injunction gap and the interaction with UK patent proceedings at [14]-[19] of his decision, summarizing previous decisions (HTC v Apple, ZTE, v Ericsson, Garmin v Phillips) where Mr Justice Arnold (as he then was) consistently expressed the view that the presence of a possible German injunction gap "was a factor to take into account". [read post]
21 May 2007, 9:08 pm
Scott Hartwig, who explicitly stated that this theory had been presented before, but their viewpoint was in the minority and created no backlash against the book (unlike what happened in the Andersonville matter, which involved explicit plagiarism.)With the release of the Supreme Court opinion in KSR v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 10:17 pm
First, in United States v. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 9:51 am
., et al. v. [read post]
14 May 2014, 8:00 am
Change “where an upwind State contributes pollutants to only a single downwind State” to “where only a single upwind State contributes pollutants to a downwind State. [read post]
