Search for: "JOSEPH B. BARR" Results 1 - 20 of 29
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Sep 2013, 5:12 am by Jon Gelman
According to the complaint, Workers' Compensation Judge Joseph B. [read post]
27 Jun 2020, 4:07 am by Matt Gluck, Tia Sewell
Jen Patja Howell shared an episode of the Lawfare Podcast featuring a conversation with Nate Persily, the James B. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 7:35 am by Daniel E. Cummins
(Pike County)On October 25, 2010, the Honorable Joseph F. [read post]
29 May 2024, 3:52 pm by Reference Staff
O’Barr, and Robin Conley RinerWhile our collection suffers from a lack of diverse voices on legal writing, Point Made and Point Taken highlight the legal writing of a wide spectrum of advocates and judges and are two of our most popular writing guidesLegal Drafting in a Nutshell (2021) by George W. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 11:57 am
Averell Harriman Chair, Governance Studies Program, the Brookings Institution Joseph Margulies, Deputy Director, MacArthur Justice Center; Associate Clinical Professor, Northwestern University School of Law Alberto Mora, Former General Counsel, Department of the Navy Norman Ornstein, Resident Scholar, the American Enterprise Institute Thomas R. [read post]
8 Jul 2007, 3:03 pm
The Justice Department refused to turn over Barr's memorandum: Initially, the Administration decided to withhold the document. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 1:16 pm by Lorenzo d’Aubert, Eric Halliday
Barr, 918 F.3d 558 (7th Cir. 2019) In Herrera-Garcia v. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 9:10 am by Daniel E. Cummins
In his order without opinion, Luzerne County Common Pleas Court Judge Joseph Van Jura denied the defense motion to compel without prejudice, apparently leaving the door open for the issue to be revisited. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 7:13 am by admin
The Bradford Hill Predicate: Ruling Out Random and Systematic Error In two recent posts, I spent some time discussing a recent law review, which had some important things to say about specific causation.[1] One of several points from which I dissented was the article’s argument that Sir Austin Bradford Hill had not made explicit that ruling out random and systematic error was required before assessing his nine “viewpoints” on whether an association was causal. [read post]