Search for: "State v. Root" Results 1021 - 1040 of 4,258
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Nov 2018, 12:10 pm by Schachtman
Indeed, their brief in other places states their opinion that significance testing is not necessary at all: “Testing for significance, however, is often mistaken for a sine qua non of scientific inference. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 10:13 pm
Alfonso, 759 F.2d at 736; United States v. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 1:00 pm by Bexis
Back in April, we put up a post complaining about Weeks v. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 4:00 am by Steve McConnell
And in the only case arising from the New Jersey state court consolidated Aredia/Zometa litigation to be tried, Bessemer v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:46 pm by Christopher Simon
Two years later with the statute of limitations about to run out, she finally came to me with over $9,000.00 in dental bills for a root canal and a new implant saying the insurer would not respond. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 10:26 pm by Orin Kerr
Third, the theories offered by the state and the United States as amicus curiae are in my view far too broad, but the best answer is actually quite tricky but should be rooted in causation principles.By way of full disclosure, I should add that I was approached by counsel for King for advice, and that I provided pro bono assistance to King in helping to craft King’s argument. [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 8:13 am by Michael Grossman
While individual states, Minnesota included, do have consumer-protection laws about failure to warn, the FDCA is currently written in such a way that Pliva, Inc. could not have complied with those state regulations unless it violated FDA guidelines, which are rooted in federal law. [read post]
23 May 2022, 8:55 am by Lawrence Solum
  Here is the abstract: The draft opinion of Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. in Dobbs v. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 1:48 pm by Lawrence Solum
Green (University of Mississippi - School of Law) has posted McDonald v. [read post]