Search for: "In the Matter Of: Inquiry Concerning a Judge No 481" Results 21 - 37 of 37
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2015, 12:01 pm
According to Judge Hull, you can’t read the Jones concurrences as overturning the third-party doctrine, either. [read post]
7 Jul 2014, 2:07 pm
Here is the text, which should also give you an idea of the issue and the main arguments, though you can also read the Ninth Circuit decision (and especially the excellent dissent, by Judge Paul Watford, for whom I have great respect). * * *Summary of Argument The speech restriction in this case, which distinguishes (1) signs “support[ing] candidates” or relating to “any other matter on the ballot,” (2) “sign[s] communicating a message or ideas,”… [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 1:11 pm
A DC district court judge ameliorated her docket by ruling the four Alice patents invalid under §101, as being drawn to mere "abstract ideas. [read post]
16 May 2011, 8:08 pm by The Legal Blog
In other words, a guilty subject is more likely to be concerned with lying about the relevant facts as opposed to lying about other facts in general. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 10:10 am by Colin Miller
” The Sixth Circuit found no problem with the girlfriend testifying concerning this statement under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E), finding that a “statement need not actually advance the conspiracy to be admissible” and that ”statements which identify the participants and their roles in the conspiracy are made ‘in furtherance’ of a conspiracy. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 4:19 pm by INFORRM
The latter inquiry is commonly referred to as the balancing exercise. [read post]
25 Oct 2010, 1:23 am by Durga Rao Vanayam
State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481, has wonderfully dealt with the issue making it very clear that education is not a trade and the merit should never be disregarded. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 10:32 am by INFORRM
The truth or falsity of the information is an irrelevant inquiry in deciding whether the information is entitled to be protected and judges should be chary of becoming side-tracked into that irrelevant inquiry [86] The second is the authoritative decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court (In re Guardian News and Media Ltd & Others [2010] UKSC 1), in light of the (reasonably) clear and consistent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) (See eg… [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 2:13 pm by Adam Thierer
  (If half of all adult Americans actually used their voucher, that would cost at least $20 billion/year.[12])  They assume this would be an efficient way of channeling money to hard news providers while avoiding the serious concerns that arise when government officials or agencies are the ones providing or steering the subsidies. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 11:23 am
The Supreme Court defended its conclusion on thebasis of general principles concerning statutoryconstruction:Our conclusion is confirmed when we consider AEDPA'spurposes. [read post]
26 Jul 2007, 11:18 am
Reilly, 533 U.S. 525, 541 (2001) ("Congressional purpose is the ultimate touchstone of our inquiry") (citing Cipollone v. [read post]