Search for: "State v. Waffle" Results 81 - 100 of 143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
The following handout materials are from the Utah State Bar Spring Convention Presentation on Ethics in Plea Negotiations: An Ethical Perspective from Defense, Prosecution, and the Bench (March 15, 2012). [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 4:44 am by Jani Ihalainen
Evidence provided needs to be quantitively sufficient to prove distinctive character in the Member States concerned. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 3:01 am
Waffle House, Inc., 534 U.S. 279 (2002), the nation’s high court stated, “The EEOC does not stand in the employee’s shoes. [read post]
25 Jun 2020, 10:00 pm by Samuel Estreicher and Daniel Folsom
But in subsequent decisions, the Court embraced a more nuanced approach: First, in United States v. [read post]
25 Nov 2009, 9:27 am by Steve Hall
Their investigations revealed that while Woods had held a steady job as a short-order cook at Waffle House, he had to have the orders read aloud to him.Alley did file an appeal claiming Woods was mentally retarded, but it was poorly put together and the court rejected it.More on Atkins v. [read post]
2 Mar 2022, 12:45 pm by Ronald Mann
ShareTuesday’s argument in Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan v. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 6:20 am
 Event report: The private copying exception and the compensation of harm in a dematerialised environmentOn 16 October last, in-between a warm waffle and a creamy chocolate, InternKat Cecilia Sbrolli participated in the Auvibel conference. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 10:05 am by Michael Scutt
Saturday Waffle: Naughty Lawyers and Bodily Functions Barrack Room Lawyers Beware originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 12/10/2011. [read post]
21 Aug 2008, 10:06 pm
See Also: MPAA Waffling On Piracy Costs; RIAA says Illicit CDs Worth $13.74 Each File Sharer Settles With RIAA for a Whopping $756 a Song Judge Hints at Mistrial in RIAA v. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 6:59 am by Joy Waltemath
Entergy argued that Oakwood Healthcare wasn’t new law—it simply adopted the rule set forth in Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v NLRB, a 2001 Fifth Circuit decision—so the Board couldn’t cite a change in law to justify its contrary conclusion here. [read post]