Search for: "In RE DP v. State" Results 1 - 20 of 112
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 May 2016, 5:07 pm
See, for example, Justice Breyer's courageous dissent in Glossip v. [read post]
9 Oct 2010, 11:59 am by brian
 was describing how his division implemented the ACEV method of fingerprint examination in ways that may violate the state and prosecutors' obligations under Brady v. [read post]
22 Feb 2019, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
The fruition of that absorption of DP law into Article 8 is apparent in the recent decision of Catt v. [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 8:39 am by Bexis
  Looking at these, we'd have to say that Alabama (and the Eleventh Circuit) have just about the most favorable sales representative precedent of any state in the country.Anyway, here they are:Harper v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 2:45 pm
This paper seeks to investigate this domain, having regard to the interests of user, relatives, platform and especially, the public interest in preservation of online cultural heritage.16 June, OECD Workshop on Internet intermediaries, Paris; closed meeting. 17 -18 June, CCD COE Conference on Cyber Conflict 2010, Tallinn, Estonia (speaking on state attribution and domestic legsl remedies for preventing cyberattacks, with Russell Buchan , Sheffield University) 28-29 June GikII V,… [read post]
6 May 2024, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
(Forthcoming)).Abubakar Yusuf Mamud, Ummah: a Holistic Framework for Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism in Nigeria, (March 16, 2024).Neil James Foster, Liability of a Bishop for Sexual Abuse Committed by Clergy: Bird v DP (A Pseudonym). [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 3:22 am by Nico Cordes
Therefore, the question arises whether he can have his right of priority re-established following the failure to observe this time limit vis-à-vis the EPO.4.4 Article 48(2)(a) PCT requires a Contracting State to excuse, for reasons admitted under its national law, any delay in meeting any time limit. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 3:22 am by Nico Cordes
Therefore, the question arises whether he can have his right of priority re-established following the failure to observe this time limit vis-à-vis the EPO.4.4 Article 48(2)(a) PCT requires a Contracting State to excuse, for reasons admitted under its national law, any delay in meeting any time limit. [read post]