Search for: "State v. Murray" Results 1041 - 1060 of 1,332
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Nov 2010, 4:00 am by Steve McConnell
We've already posted a couple of times about the Thorogood v. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 10:40 pm by 1 Crown Office Row
I will begin by summarising the present state of that law. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 8:35 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  On September 27, 2018, the Kentucky Supreme Court, in Northern Kentucky Area Development District v. [read post]
26 Apr 2007, 3:11 am
Murray failed to present available defenses that were likely to change the outcome of the trial. [read post]
15 May 2022, 4:48 pm by INFORRM
On 12 May 2022, there were hearings in the cases of Lee -v- Brown before Collins Rice J and MPL -v- WSZ before Saini J. [read post]
14 Nov 2022, 2:12 am by INFORRM
Donelan has ditched the previous Secretary of State’s inflated claims that the DPDI Bill saved over £1 billion. [read post]
22 May 2014, 11:45 am
Mandatory retirement provisions within partnership agreements do not violate labour laws or human rights, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled today in McCormick v. [read post]
9 May 2021, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
United States A federal judge in Maryland this week followed through on a previous warning to sanction a lawyer best known for representing Rep. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 5:10 am by Marie Louise
Murray (IP finance) United States US Patent Reform America Invents Act: First to Invent v. [read post]
30 Oct 2017, 7:09 am by Andrew Hamm
For example, he mounted a successful challenge to the segregated law schools in Maryland (in the Maryland Court of Appeals case Murray v. [read post]
26 Nov 2015, 6:19 am by Ben
Back in 2004, Californian state senator Kevin Murray wrote this in a report in US recording industry practices:“Much like the public generally dislikes politicians, but love their individual representatives, Artists have respect for their record company handlers, but distrust the companies themselves and the system they operate under. [read post]
24 Oct 2021, 4:17 pm by INFORRM
The report, a first of its kind, found that existing surveillance law is being eroded by six factors: the introduction of new laws that expand state surveillance powers; lack of legal precision and privacy safeguards in existing surveillance legislation; increased supply of new surveillance technologies that enable illegitimate surveillance; state agencies regularly conducting surveillance outside of what is permitted in law; impunity for those committing illegitimate acts of… [read post]