Search for: "HARDING v. STATE"
Results 121 - 140
of 18,017
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Inst. v. [read post]
21 Apr 2024, 2:25 pm
United States. [read post]
20 Apr 2024, 6:37 pm
-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had little justification in the internationallaw the United States claimed to be upholding, and the United States prosecuted the wars whileindifferent to the civilian casualties they imposed. [read post]
19 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
In the case of Lucykanish v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 9:04 pm
After an unsuccessful direct appeal, United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 8:16 am
Court of Federal Claims’ 2023 determination in Myriddian, LLC v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 7:49 am
There have been some striking rulings cutting back on agency power, such as West Virginia v. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 7:05 pm
I attended oral arguments in the case Snyder v. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 6:00 pm
V. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 8:52 am
But it is hard to distinguish the rationale under 28 USC § 2401(a). [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 11:04 pm
The Supreme Court decision is Sheetz v. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 1:21 pm
In Harris v. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 1:21 pm
In Harris v. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 6:11 am
That the petitioner has the ability and motivation to drive safely and within the law. v. [read post]
11 Apr 2024, 9:00 pm
United States. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
Being a Catholic politician could be hard, he noted, in a pluralistic society like the United States. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 7:06 am
In Lindke v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am
In December 1996, Judge Jones issued his decision that excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ proposed testimony on grounds that it failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702.[5] In October 1996, while Judge Jones was studying the record, and writing his opinion in the Hall case, Judge Weinstein, with a judge from the Southern District of New York, and another from New York state trial court, conducted a two-week Rule 702 hearing, in Brooklyn. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 4:10 am
In State of Texas v. [read post]
