Search for: "Al Smith" Results 101 - 120 of 2,347
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Nov 2015, 12:04 pm by Tom Smith
According to House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), who is leading a Congressional investigation into the infamous Karl et al 2015 “Pausebuster” study, NOAA whistleblowers have come forward, with information which cast doubt on the scientific integrity of NOAA’s global temperature reconstructions. [read post]
29 Dec 2007, 4:12 am
Knolls Atomic Power Lab, et al., limited to the question asking whether, under the Court's 2005 decision in Smith v. [read post]
29 Dec 2007, 4:35 am
Knolls Atomic Power Lab, et al., limited to the question asking whether, under the Court's 2005 decision in Smith v. [read post]
16 May 2024, 4:45 pm by John Gotaskie
The Supreme Court issued a decision today in a case named Smith, et al. v. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 7:50 am by Tom Smith
Just a thought -- maybe a webinar for Krugman, Olbermann et al. called something like The Marketplace of Ideas and Why Just Making Stuff Up Is Usually A Bad Idea? [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 8:44 am by Tom Smith
 If we are going to try KSM et al. in New York because some former law professor who was on the defense side in jihadi prosecution thought it was a good idea -- well, that's just shocking. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 7:25 am by Daily Record Staff
Contracts — Arbitration clause — Automobile purchase This appeal arises from an order issued by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City to compel arbitration in a contract action for the purchase of an automobile. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 7:44 am by Daily Record Staff
Torts — Lead paint — Satisfaction of judgment This case began in May 2000 when Lamar Lynch (“Lynch”), appellee, by his mother and next friend Nora Smith, brought suit against the Housing Authority of Baltimore City (the “HABC”), appellant, alleging injuries resulting from exposure to lead paint at a property owned and operated by the ... [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 10:42 pm by Steve Vladeck
Smith had held that “[t]his argument . . . fails to give adequate weight to the plain language of § 4001(a) proscribing detention of any kind by the United States, absent a congressional grant of authority to detain. [read post]