Search for: "The PEOPLE v. Sims" Results 141 - 160 of 209
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Sep 2010, 2:39 pm by Kent Scheidegger
The People thereupon notified condemned inmates, including Sims, that they would resume scheduling executions. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 1:15 pm by Susan Brenner
However, the battery . . . was dead, so Herrera removed the SIM card and placed it in another cell phone. . . . [read post]
22 Aug 2010, 9:20 pm by Steve Bainbridge
(84) Pittsburgh: People were going for DSTs early, so I joined the bandwagon. 10 [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 10:59 am
The Court of Appeal, in an opinion by Justice Sims -- joined by Justice Raye and the future Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court, Justice Cantil-Sakauye -- says yes.I've changed the facts of the opinion, of course. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 11:08 pm by The Complex Litigator
Employment Comm'n, 28 Cal.2d 33, 43-44, 168 P.2d 686 (1946), overruled on other grounds by People v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 10:40 pm by (Peter Black)
An imputation will be considered defamatory if it exposed the plaintiff to hate, contempt or ridicule (see Ettingshausen v Australian Consolidated Press (1991) 23 NSW LR 443); tended to make the plaintiff shunned or avoided (Morgan v Lingen (1863) 8 LT 800); tended to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of others (Sim v Stretch (1936) 52 TLR 669). [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 7:20 am by INFORRM
   Neither Sim v Stretch nor Jameel are directed to the issue and provide no clear support for the approach. [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 12:06 pm
I‘ve never seen so many people so eager to get out of here. [read post]
10 May 2010, 4:51 am by Jeff Gamso
Sims said after the hearing the house needs to be protected because of threats to burn it down. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 1:04 pm by Michael Heise
Torts folks might be interested in a recent paper by Griffin Sims Edwards (Emory, Econ), Doing Their Duty: An Empirical Analysis of the Unintended Effect of Tarasoff v Regents on Homicidal Activity. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 3:19 am by Adam Kolber
This piece, recently posted to SSRN, suggests that the obligations to disclose under the Tarasoff case caused an increase in homicide (presumably by disincentivizing treatment of the most at-risk patients): "Doing Their Duty: An Empirical Analysis of the Unintended Effect of Tarasoff v Regents on Homicidal Activity"  GRIFFIN SIMS EDWARDS, Emory University, Department of EconomicsThe effect of state duty to warn laws inspired by Tarasoff v Regents has been… [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 12:36 pm by Christine Hurt
  "So I am concerned about the 5 hours, about the lack of recusal for cause, about the very, very brief questions that he provided to people who had said on the questionnaire they could be -- they could be biased. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 11:35 am by Lyle Denniston
  The Justices seemed far more interested in the jury issue than in the other high-profile question before them in Skilling v. [read post]