Search for: "Timothy v. Timothy" Results 1121 - 1140 of 2,616
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Feb 2015, 8:14 am
"The Amicus Briefs Supporting the Government's Position in King v. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:41 am by Amy Howe
Coverage and commentary continue to focus on King v. [read post]
1 Feb 2015, 10:35 am by Guest Blogger
Timothy Jost On January 28, 2015, thirty amicus briefs were filed in the Supreme Court supporting the validity of the Internal Revenue Service rule in King v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 7:15 am
Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal of Timothy Dale Bornyk and ordered a new trial as a result of the conduct of Supreme Court Justice Gordon Funt in R. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 4:47 am by Amy Howe
Other coverage and commentary center on King v. [read post]
17 Jan 2015, 1:19 pm by Randall Hodgkinson
Timothy Cooper, No. 106,986 (Wyandotte)Direct appeal (petition for review); Aggravated batteryRick KittelImproper response to jury questionsFailure to give lesser-included offense instructionsState v. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 9:30 pm by RegBlog
There is More to Mandatory Disclosure than Meets the Eye Timothy D. [read post]
25 Dec 2014, 2:12 am
 Is practice in Europe the same as that articulated in Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors Group, or is there a spread of practices, in which case it will be good to know which approach will be adopted when we have a single European unitary patent, construed by the Unified Patent Court. [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 1:00 pm by Karen Tani
We noted this book back in July, when we posted Timothy Huebner's Spring 2014 round-up of New Books in U.S. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 12:34 am by Editors
Time to check your crystal ball to see what it portends for the legal industry in 2015 – or you can just head over to the Business of Law Blog to see what others think. [read post]
12 Dec 2014, 4:53 am by Amy Howe
In The New England Journal of Medicine, Nicholas Bagley, David Jones, and Timothy Jost discuss the possible impact of a decision in favor of the challengers in King v. [read post]