Search for: "State v. D. M. B." Results 1661 - 1680 of 3,627
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Oct 2015, 1:07 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  The Supreme Court held that the state could require an additional disclosure clarifying that fees and costs were different things and that, if they lost, they’d still be liable for costs. [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 7:32 am by Florian Mueller
It's not an unusual communication pattern that A writes or says things to B that are actually directed at C. [read post]
17 Oct 2015, 2:03 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  © preemption is important in the 8thCir. b/c Ray v. [read post]
15 Oct 2015, 6:01 am by Administrator
Also in the United States, Sarat found that some judges in Wisconsin state trial courts ‘frequently engaged in conversation and joked with both lawyers and litigants’ and Anesa noted that, in one Californian jury trial, ‘humor and wittiness emerge[d] constantly’. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 11:13 am by Lyle Denniston
The state regulatory agencies and private energy companies that oppose the FERC mandate sent Washington lawyer Paul D. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 10:24 am by Steve Vladeck
Nashiri has raised distinct challenges to the commission's authority over both of these episodes, arguing that the Cole bombing took place at a time when there was no armed conflict between the United States and al Qaeda, and that the attack on the M/V Limburg--a French-flag ship in the Gulf of Aden--cannot reasonably be connected to the (by then clearly established) non-international armed conflict between the United States and al Qaeda. [read post]
25 Sep 2015, 9:31 am by Rebecca Tushnet
 Distinguish notice of existence v. notice of scope. [read post]