Search for: "CARTER v. STATE" Results 81 - 100 of 1,879
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jun 2022, 5:57 am by Jeff Welty
The Fourth Circuit does not appear to have dealt with an allegation of tight handcuffing since Carter v. [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 12:23 pm by William Hibbitts | JURIST Staff
Legal expert Benjamin Ginsberg, who represented Republicans in election disputes including Bush v. [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 12:39 am by INFORRM
Carter-Ruck partner Guy Martin’s interview on LBC can be listened to here. [read post]
5 Jun 2022, 4:26 pm by INFORRM
The Minister of State for Media, Data and Digital Infrastructure has also announced an Online Advertising Programme will review regulatory frameworks of paid digital advertising. [read post]
2 Jun 2022, 10:02 am by Jennifer González
After eight years of regulatory roadblocks, Continental sued the CAB (Continental Airlines v. [read post]
25 May 2022, 4:00 am by Administrator
Brown, 2022 SCC 18 [2] At common law, automatism is “a state of impaired consciousness, rather than unconsciousness, in which an individual, though capable of action, has no voluntary control over that action” (R. v. [read post]
24 May 2022, 6:07 am by David Pocklington
Guernsey Assisted dying in Guernsey: On 7 February 2018, seven Members of the States lodged a Requête – P.2018/24 (Deputy St Pier and 6 other Members) relating to assisted dying for future consideration at States Meetings. [read post]
20 May 2022, 9:30 am by Elizabeth Whatcott
” April 4: The Speaker of the Albanian Parliament Lindita Nikolla states: “The mass killings of innocent people in Bucha and other regions of Ukraine show that the violence of the Russian army is escalating into forms of genocide. [read post]
13 May 2022, 6:44 am by Paul Stephan
When a state suffers from another state’s breach of a duty owed to it, international law allows the injured state to respond by suspending its own obligations to the lawbreaking state. [read post]
Former US President Jimmy Carter Monday filed an amicus brief to state his disagreement with a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, calling the ruling “deeply mistaken” and “dangerous. [read post]