Search for: "Burn v Burn"
Results 161 - 180
of 4,967
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2023, 10:16 am
That campaign crashed and burned long before Election Day, however. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 1:31 pm
Fighting fire with fire: How NEPA's emphasis on risk prevents prescribed burns and intensifies wildfire. [read post]
7 Sep 2023, 5:17 am
In S.B.B. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 8:54 am
A tractor trailer or semi-truck is said to “jackknife” when the trailer swings around form behind and off to the side so that the truck comes to rest in the form of an “L” or “V” shape. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 8:03 am
Prompted by Estate of Gentry v. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 12:16 pm
Regardless, Judge Sanchez's majority opinion says that it's not clear that the judge relied that much on the (alleged) broken promise, whereas Judge Mendoza (in dissent) thinks that the judge probably did.You can read the record for yourself and see which view you fight most appealing in this regard.But I can add one thing -- something that's maybe (okay, certainly) not subject to judicial notice, but is nonetheless something as to which I'm fairly/supremely confident.The… [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 4:45 pm
Penal Code § 9.42; see, e.g., McFadden v. [read post]
26 Aug 2023, 11:42 am
Malone v. [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 7:31 am
In Texas v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
Exemptions are construed "narrowly, and an agency has the burden of demonstrating that an exemption applies 'by articulating a particularized and specific justification for denying access'" (Matter of Kosmider v Whitney, 34 NY3d 48, 54, quoting Matter of Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, 566; see Matter of Abdur-Rashid v New York City Police Dept., 31 NY3d 217, 225). [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
Exemptions are construed "narrowly, and an agency has the burden of demonstrating that an exemption applies 'by articulating a particularized and specific justification for denying access'" (Matter of Kosmider v Whitney, 34 NY3d 48, 54, quoting Matter of Capital Newspapers Div. of Hearst Corp. v Burns, 67 NY2d 562, 566; see Matter of Abdur-Rashid v New York City Police Dept., 31 NY3d 217, 225). [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 2:20 am
The CBC guidance notes on net zero emissions are clearly the result of detailed technical consideration of the issues involved, but without external verification, to mis-quote Bullimore Ch, “make the Guidance notes a very different sort of animal [from the “statutory guidance”] considered in Regina (Munjaz) v Mersey Care NHS Trust [2006] 2 AC 148]. [read post]
22 Aug 2023, 4:00 am
The Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of his prosecution for cross burning in Virginia v. [read post]
21 Aug 2023, 12:51 pm
Hasan v. [read post]
21 Aug 2023, 6:05 am
Last month, the International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression (ICPA) against Ukraine opened its doors in The Hague. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 12:04 pm
” Black involved a statute banning cross-burning. [read post]
10 Aug 2023, 3:00 am
July 28, 2023). 2Rod & Reel v. [read post]
6 Aug 2023, 3:00 am
In Olmsted Medical Center v. [read post]
26 Jul 2023, 12:32 pm
Joyce & Wicked Willow Press, LLC v. [read post]
26 Jul 2023, 11:54 am
In short, the data ICE release shows the agency’s FOIA Office is burning through mandatory statutory deadlines with no end in sight. [read post]
