Search for: "Graham v State"
Results 1381 - 1400
of 2,165
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 May 2011, 7:32 am
Farber (Northeastern University) Privacy in the Workplace: City of Ontario v Quon *Clifford S Fishman (Catholic University of America) Consent-To-Search and Dignity *Josephine Ross (Howard University) Abstract: This country is at a crossroads regarding privacy. [read post]
24 May 2011, 10:58 am
As originally introduced, the FSA would have equalized the treatment of crack and powder[7]—which is precisely what is done in the great majority of states.[8] Although powder cocaine sentencing provides the most natural benchmark to assess the proportionality of crack sentencing, it is not the only benchmark that should be borne in mind. [read post]
20 May 2011, 1:33 pm
The latest contribution to the Second Circuit’s reversal docket is a 400-page sentencing opinion from earlier this week, United States v. [read post]
20 May 2011, 11:04 am
“We arrive at our holding by applying the two-step approach employed by the United States Supreme Court, most recently in Graham v. [read post]
20 May 2011, 10:22 am
Today, in State v. [read post]
20 May 2011, 10:08 am
Today, in State v. [read post]
20 May 2011, 7:41 am
Namely, just as Congress abrogated the Court’s decision in Graham County Soil and Water Conservation District v. [read post]
18 May 2011, 10:23 am
The ruling in the case, Graham v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 8:24 am
" In Graham v. [read post]
16 May 2011, 9:07 am
” Teleflex Inc. v. [read post]
16 May 2011, 3:27 am
Corp. v U.S. ex rel. [read post]
13 May 2011, 1:48 pm
Texaco (the existence of a licensing market is itself probative of unfair use) without Bill Graham Archives v. [read post]
11 May 2011, 9:41 am
His attorneys are now urging the court to expand their ruling in Graham v. [read post]
11 May 2011, 8:50 am
See also Graham v. [read post]
10 May 2011, 4:55 pm
Argument was held on May 10, 2011 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Liberty University, Inc. v. [read post]
10 May 2011, 1:29 pm
The panel disregarded secondary considerations of non-obviousness provided for by Graham v. [read post]
4 May 2011, 11:19 am
Jed Graham, writing at Investor Business Daily's Capital Hill blog, makes this keen observation:"[V]irtually no one understands what the law means or how premium subsidies will grow over time — and it’s a near certainty that the confusion extends to the members of Congress who voted for it. [read post]
3 May 2011, 6:20 am
In Johnson-Graham-Malone, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm
At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 6:11 am
In United States v. [read post]
