Search for: "Ex Parte Devine"
Results 21 - 39
of 39
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
Seven Theories of the Case: What Do We Really Know about L’Affaire Russe and What Could it All Mean?
1 May 2017, 9:11 am
Page was never part of the Trump inner circle, but his connections to Russia were apparently serious enough for the FISA Court to issue a warrant for surveillance of his communications to investigate him. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 6:00 am
Artists battle over a Chicago mural of Michelle Obama First off today, Derek Hawkins at The Washington Post reports that Chicago artist Chris Devin is being accused of plagiarism in a public mural that he created in part with funds raised on GoFundMe. [read post]
5 Mar 2017, 2:30 pm
§§ 1806 and 1825 as part of his criminal defense. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 1:25 am
Also on Schillings Jane Ashford-Thom has published a guide to combating clickbait: Part One and Part Two. [read post]
30 Jul 2016, 7:50 pm
And the district court used the wrong edition of the Guidelines Manual to calculate the number of victims, leading to an ex post facto violation. [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 2:50 pm
JUSTICE GUZMAN filed a concurring opinion, in which JUSTICE LEHRMANN and JUSTICE DEVINE joined. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 8:49 am
Ex parte Devine, 398 So. 2d 686 (Ala. 1981). [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 8:49 am
Ex parte Devine, 398 So. 2d 686 (Ala. 1981). [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 6:07 am
"Afghanistan: Obama’s Moment of Decision" http://j.mp/jsU71R "Anthony Weiner’s Ex: He Lied to Me" ... [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 4:21 am
The award, which is the largest of its kind in North Carolina history, was part of a default judgment - Devin neither appeared in court nor was she represented by an attorney. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 3:50 am
The basic summary is that three ex-MPs, Morley, Chaytor and Devine, and one member of the House of Lords, Lord Hanningfield, are charged with false accounting relating to their parliamentary expenses claims. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 6:42 pm
Bad Exes Meet the world’s worst retired leaders. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 1:21 pm
What does a court do when part of an agreement is fine, but some parts are not? [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 3:30 am
The appeal was of Mr Justice Saunders’ ruling in the Southwark Crown Court that the parliamentary privilege enshrined in the 1688 Bill of Rights does not extend to protecting the four ex-MPs, Elliott Morley, David Chaytor, James Devine and Lord Hanningfield, from prosecutions for claiming inflated expenses. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 11:00 pm
This will not be the end of the affair, however, as leave to appeal has been granted with the case to be heard by the Court of Appeal as early as before the end of this month Mr Justice Saunders sitting the Southwark Crown Court ruled that the parliamentary privilege enshrined in the 1688 Bill of Rights does not extend to protecting the four ex-MPs, Elliott Morley, David Chaytor, James Devine and Lord Hanningfield, from prosecutions for claiming inflated expenses. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 5:58 am
The Guardian noted: “The judge said the argument that submitting an expenses form was part of the proceedings of parliament, and therefore protected by privilege, was akin to saying that the coin used in a slot machine was part of its machinery. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 6:08 am
This was largely based on the belief that the mother was "the softest and safest nurse of infancy" and that “to grant custody of a child to a father was to hold nature in contempt, and snatch helpless, puling infancy from the bosom of an affectionate mother, and place it in the coarse hands of the father,” as the Alabama Supreme Court notes in Ex parte Devine, quoting the 1830 case Helms v. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 5:50 pm
How are they to devine the reasons why their predecessors concluded that something serious enough went awry in those trials to warrant a new trial “in the interest of justice”? [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 1:09 pm
Burns, No. 07-5942 Dismissal of pro se prisoner's civil rights action against fourteen judges and justices of various Tennessee courts in their official capacities is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) contrary to the ruling below, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not apply to plaintiff's facial constitutional challenge to Tennessee statutes governing collateral review; but 2) an as-applied challenge was barred under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. [read post]
