Search for: "Matter of Andrew B."
Results 981 - 1000
of 1,077
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Sep 2009, 12:09 pm
Magistrate Judge Robert B. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 11:37 am
The Superior Court, Orange County, No. 05CC04248, Andrew P. [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 3:44 pm
Kirkpatrick PREPARING AND USING DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE, Presented by Andrew J. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 10:44 am
(Quincy, MA; Michael Foster, President) B&L Industries, Inc. [read post]
12 Aug 2009, 6:38 pm
Andrew B. [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 2:34 am
It matters little whether the incidence of sex crimes is low; the public reacts to the danger they perceive. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 6:16 am
At the County Court hearing under s 143N, Housing Act 1996, the judge appears to have proceeded on a gateway (b) path a la Kay/Doherty, and found that none of the matters referred to in the possession notice would have been sufficient on their own; the review panel had not ducked the issue of whether Clive and Devon were still living in the property; that the council was entitled to rely on matters after the possession notice which Mr Pinnock knew about and had an… [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 7:04 am
Andrew Donohue, the SEC’s Director of Investment Management, discussed these and other potential regulatory reforms in his testimony on July 15, 2009, before the Subcommittee on Securities, Insurance, and Investment of the U.S. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 4:38 am
ANDREW PEK v. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:33 am
Cir. 2008): Limits patentable subject matter. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 8:28 pm
B. [read post]
9 Jul 2009, 12:10 pm
Andrew Odlyzko, and Bill St. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 4:43 am
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham; Bush's chief economic advisor, Lawrence B. [read post]
17 Jun 2009, 9:32 am
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.JON BARTLETT, ANDREW R. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 8:40 am
"Nate Anderson at ars technica goes into the legal details in his French court savages "three-strikes" law, tosses it out, pointing out that a critical flaw in the Three Strikes Law was the fact that the USER had to prove that he had not illegally engaged in file-sharing in order to retain his or her threatened cut-off from Internet access:"[B]ut the burden of proof was on the Internet user....In its ruling [.pdf here (in French)], this was precisely the issue that the… [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 7:41 am
This problem is not the same as “broker voting,” which has already been repealed on “non-routine” matters and, we hope, will soon be repealed for so-called “routine” matters, such as the election of directors. [read post]
29 May 2009, 2:36 pm
The challenge can be on any of the grounds of public law, irrationality, illegality or procedural impropriety (see CCSU and “Doherty: The Facts of the Matter” Andrew Arden QC [2008] 11 JHL 98). [read post]
26 May 2009, 1:53 pm
Led by attorneys Theodore B. [read post]
24 May 2009, 10:45 am
California, defining unprotected "obscenity" as speech that (a) "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find . . . appeals to the prurient interest," when "taken as a whole" (b) that "depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law;" and (c) that "taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. [read post]
23 May 2009, 7:20 am
B. [read post]
