Search for: "U. S. v. Force" Results 1301 - 1320 of 1,711
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Mar 2011, 1:02 pm by George
v=mMDV3eISLPs ) GWG: hahaha, the force is strong Nick: but your deflections and reality will soon seal your fate GWG: btw I heard you and my ex had a heart to heart about me,  anything good? [read post]
8 Feb 2008, 12:30 am
" Some tax protesters have argued that, when a person signs a tax return "[u]nder penalties of perjury" (which is printed above the line for the taxpayer's signature) they are being forced to violate their right not to be a witness against themselves. [read post]
6 Jun 2018, 9:00 am by Josh Blackman
In contrast, the independent-counsel statute at issue in Morrison v. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 2:13 am by INFORRM
The Online Safety Act, which came into force on 31 January 2024, criminalises the offence of cyberflashing. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 3:20 am by Peter Mahler
Huang v Northern Star Management LLC, 2016 NY Slip Op 32194(U) [Sup Ct NY County Oct. 24, 2016]. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
  If only some, then there’s the additional question of how much effort the legal system should expend, or force the parties to expend, in sorting one from the other.We thought we’d explore that question today, and we start by comparing arguably the most pro-plaintiff state in the country – Idaho – on comment k issues with the most pro-defense state – California. [read post]
14 Mar 2009, 12:06 am
United States, 406 U S 441, 92 S Ct. 1653, 32 L.Ed. 212 (1972), we recently reaffirmed the principle that the privilege against self-incrimination can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory, or adjudicatory. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 5:09 am by SHG
On the other hand, economics was never my sole driving force. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 8:28 pm
Dist. 365-U, No. 08-1850 In a student's suit challenging his expulsion on due-process grounds, denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed where, because plaintiff received notice and a hearing prior to his expulsion, he was unlikely to prevail on the merits and therefore was not entitled to injunctive relief. [read post]