Search for: "Downs v. Jones" Results 1661 - 1680 of 2,144
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Dec 2015, 11:56 am by Ted Brooks
We were proud to work with the TI/Jones Day team on that trial (yes, we used TrialDirector to great effect). [read post]
8 Apr 2018, 8:26 pm
Jones (1872), by which one "defers" to hierarchical churches, and follows majority rule in congregational ones. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 1:28 am
The Court of Appeal consisting of Lady Justice Arden, Lord Justice Lloyd Jones and Lord Justice Kitchin (who gave the leading judgment) handed down its decision on this point last Wednesday in Comic Enterprises v Twentieth Century Fox Film [2016] EWCA Civ 455 . [read post]
8 Apr 2018, 2:09 pm
Jones (1872), by which one "defers" to hierarchical churches, and follows majority rule in congregational ones. [read post]
28 Jun 2023, 4:27 am by SHG
After all, who would believe that when ChatGPT tells you that Smith v. [read post]
26 Nov 2015, 4:42 pm by INFORRM
This country’s landmark contribution to the international jurisprudence, almost a generation ago now, in Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick, was dismissed by a technologically savvy English judge in 2005 as having treated communications via the internet as if they were “seaside postcards sent by conventional means”. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 8:52 pm by Gritsforbreakfast
At his blog Defending People, he notes that:Texas’s highest criminal court, the Court of Criminal Appeals, has held, in Stearnes v. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 10:42 am by Kent Scheidegger
It just does not believe that Wilson is disabled enough not to be executed in Texas--a flagrant violation of the 2002 Supreme Court ruling in Atkins v. [read post]
1 Jul 2016, 3:00 am by SOG Staff
The opinion was delivered in Voisine v. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 11:31 am by Gene Takagi
Summary of today’s Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 1:01 am by Josh Blackman
Consistent with this congressional oversight purpose, we ask you to explain how your involvement in the decision to grant en banc review in Jones v. [read post]