Search for: "STATE v COOL"
Results 1221 - 1240
of 1,411
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2009, 5:50 pm
On May 27, 2009, in the case of State v. [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 3:40 pm
Today's CAAF grant in United States v. [read post]
24 May 2009, 1:02 pm
For Sunday 24 May 2009, this is the Law Is Cool Podcast. [read post]
15 May 2009, 7:49 am
But in Duamutef v. [read post]
12 May 2009, 11:04 am
Furthermore, state laws may require different or additional provisions to ensure the desired result. [read post]
7 May 2009, 2:07 pm
Since section 112 only addresses the termination of service contracts, this amendment really isn't absolutely necessary, and this is especially so in light of Justice Paul Perel's decision in the case of PSCC No. 668 v. [read post]
7 May 2009, 1:09 pm
Ex-NCAA Quarterback Sues Electronic Arts Over Games [Bloomberg] Sam Keller Takes On 'The Man' [Nebraska State Paper] Keller v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 2:02 pm
Furthermore, state laws may require different or additional provisions to ensure the desired result. [read post]
5 Apr 2009, 6:00 pm
Commissioner v. [read post]
3 Apr 2009, 7:23 pm
LLC v W. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 5:54 am
Riverkeeper, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 7:40 pm
United States, 128 S. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 9:33 am
Although the ruling in Entergy Corp. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 7:20 am
EPA (07-588), on the Clean Water Act and the regulation of power plant cooling structures. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 7:06 am
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority in Harbison v. [read post]
31 Mar 2009, 1:57 pm
That approach was also affirmed by the current Supreme Court in the ITW v. [read post]
24 Mar 2009, 12:58 pm
Carter v. [read post]
24 Mar 2009, 11:52 am
" Danny joked about his friends coming over and "rid[ing her] horses" after she mentioned she liked the country and had horses, and Danny told J. she had a "really cool voice" and he could "‘[p]robably talk to [her] all day.'" During the second week of phone calls, Danny left a message stating he had something to tell J. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 11:36 am
The Supreme Court set the train in motion with Massachusetts v. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 4:59 am
The Court granted review in two cases, but really only one was left pending:PD-0059-09, State v. [read post]
