Search for: "Duke v. Georgia"
Results 161 - 180
of 187
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Dec 2022, 9:05 pm
May, President of the Free State Foundation In West Virginia v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 4:02 pm
Problem areas include what “unaware” means, the exclusion of electronic communications such as emails and the very broad common law definition of “publication” which has not changed since Duke of Brunswick v Hamer (1849) 14 QB 185. [read post]
4 May 2021, 8:49 am
Barry, John William Hatfield, & Scott Duke Kominers, To Thine Own Self Be True? [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 4:00 am
Richard Kopf Why CLS proves that Buck v. [read post]
24 Oct 2018, 4:33 pm
John Reed Stark Most readers are undoubtedly familiar with the concept of “insider trading” – that is, the purchase or sale by company insiders of their personal holdings in company shares based on material non-public information. [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 7:19 am
The Frankfurter Papers are of special note because they reveal how the Supreme Court approached the Brown v. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 7:12 am
” Several weeks later, on July 18, Justice Elena Kagan appeared at Georgetown as well, where she recounted her memorable Kimble v. [read post]
6 May 2012, 5:24 am
In Georgia. [read post]
17 May 2024, 1:07 pm
Health insurance at one Georgia sheriff's office doesn't cover sex changes. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 9:30 pm
Mandy Cooper, Duke University, “A House of Cards: Familial Economic Networks and the State in Antebellum North Carolina. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 4:14 am
Supreme Court’s 1974 decision in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:14 am
As discussed here, in Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi, v. [read post]
7 Oct 2007, 5:05 am
Our prediction of winners: 1-1, against the spread 1-1ThursdayKentucky v. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 8:43 am
But his administration’s decision on this case, Connecticut v. [read post]
6 Dec 2007, 7:45 am
Raleigh, NC 27673 Phone: (919) 733-9250; (V/TTY); (800) 821-6922 (V/TTY/Toll Free in NC only) Fax: (919) 733-9173 Pathways to the Future, Inc. 525 Mineral Springs Drive Sylva, NC 28779 Phone: (828) 631-1167(V/TTY) Fax: (828) 631-1169 E-mail: pathways@main.nc.us State ADA Coordinator Larry Jones NC Office on the ADA 217 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27603-1336 Phone: (919) 715-2302 (V/TTY) E-mail: Larry.Jones@ncmail.net Web:… [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 2:14 pm
. : University of California Press, c2010.ChinaHT147.C48 V57 2010Cities surround the countryside : urban aesthetics in post-socialist China / Robin Visser.Visser, Robin, 1962-Durham [NC] : Duke University Press, c2010.ChinaJQ1516 .C433 2010Allies of the state : China's private entrepreneurs and democratic change / Jie Chen, Bruce J. [read post]
8 Jun 2018, 12:30 pm
THURSDAY The Rights Revolution in Action: The Transformation of State Institutions after the 1960sThu, 6/7: 8:00 AM—9:45 AM, Sheraton Centre Toronto, Forest Hill · Chair/Discussant—Sara Mayeux, Vanderbilt University · Ingraham v. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:49 am
New York: Wolters Kluwer, c2011 KF245 .B68 2011 See Catalog Civil rights movements -- Georgia -- Atlanta -- History COURAGE TO DISSENT: ATLANTA AND THE LONG HISTORY OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT / TOMIKO BROWN-NAGIN Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2011 KF4757 .B74 2011 See Catalog Civil unions -- Law and legislation -- United States MAKING IT LEGAL: A GUIDE TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE, DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS & CIVIL UNIONS / FREDERICK C. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 9:23 am
New York: Wolters Kluwer, c2011 KF245 .B68 2011 See Catalog Civil rights movements -- Georgia -- Atlanta -- History COURAGE TO DISSENT: ATLANTA AND THE LONG HISTORY OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT / TOMIKO BROWN-NAGIN Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2011 KF4757 .B74 2011 See Catalog Civil unions -- Law and legislation -- United States MAKING IT LEGAL: A GUIDE TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE, DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS & CIVIL UNIONS / FREDERICK C. [read post]
10 Oct 2018, 12:40 pm
John Reed Stark Earlier this week, media reports circulated that this past spring Google had exposed the private data of thousands of the Google+ social network users and then opted not to disclose the issue, in part because of concerns that doing so would draw regulatory scrutiny and cause reputational damage. [read post]
