Search for: "MATTER OF H D" Results 1001 - 1020 of 3,840
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Mar 2011, 2:18 am by Bob Kraft
(g) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under Subsection (d) is a Class A misdemeanor. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 3:46 am by Bob Kraft
(g) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under Subsection (d) is a Class A misdemeanor. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 7:35 am by Jonathan H. Adler
It does not, as the Court's substantive due process cases suppose, "forbi[d] the government to infringe certain 'fundamental' liberty interests at all, no matter what process is provided. [read post]
1 May 2014, 5:26 pm
” Tweeting his article, Beutler wrote “Scalia failed a test we’d normally apply to political opinion journalists. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 4:16 am
As a preliminary matter, the Court reaffirmed its holding that § 1681m(h)(8) eliminates private rights of action for all claims under § 1681m, not simply for those claims brought under § 1681m(h). [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 7:19 am by emagraken
(h)      The Plaintiff’s Special Damages These are matters that should be identified by the plaintiff for the defendant, but not as particulars of the pleadings. [read post]
13 Nov 2022, 9:01 pm by Laurence H. Tribe
Despite the technical sound of the term “standing,” the principle for which it stands isn’t a matter of legal etiquette or a finicky demand that all the i’s be dotted and the t’s crossed—but rather a basic matter of governmental power and its constitutional limits.Judge Pittman stepped completely outside this judicial role as constrained by the Supreme Court’s standing doctrine. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 3:09 pm
Turning to that portion of the defendant's motion which seeks dismissal in the interests of justice, CPL 170.40 (1) provides, in relevant part, that the criminal charge against the defendant "may be dismissed in the interest of justice when, even though there may be no basis for dismissal as a matter of law such dismissal is required as a matter of judicial discretion by the existence of some compelling factor, consideration or circumstance clearly demonstrating that conviction or… [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 2:56 am by Kevin LaCroix
  The bonds in both the Jacobson and Nine Thirty FEF matters contain riders which provide that they will cover loss resulting directly from the dishonest acts of any Outside Investment Advisor na [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 5:39 pm by Carl Shusterman
  In a unanimous decision, they ruled that “contrary to the BIA’s interpretation in Matter of Wang, the benefits of 8 U.S.C. section 1153(h)(3) unambiguously apply to all petitions described in section 1153(h)(2)…” While the government had not appealed the 5th Circuit’s decision in Khalid v. [read post]
12 Jan 2019, 10:36 am by Florian Mueller
Faced with the choice between which of the two I'd want to negotiate with, or work for, I'd clearly consider Mr. [read post]