Search for: "Johnson v. People" Results 641 - 660 of 2,503
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Apr 2020, 9:01 pm by Leslie C. Griffin
Even post-Civil War and post-Brown v. [read post]
22 Mar 2020, 5:12 pm by INFORRM
On 18 March 2020 Nicol J handed down judgment in the case of Johnson v McArdle [2020] EWHC 644 (QB) Events 30 September 2020, 5RB Conference, IET Savoy Place. [read post]
20 Mar 2020, 6:00 am by Mark Graber
  Georgia declared implementing the Supreme Court’s decision in Chisholm v. [read post]
16 Mar 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For example, in Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
8 Mar 2020, 9:01 pm by Jeffrey Morris
President Lyndon Johnson nominated Weinstein in January 1967, and he was confirmed three months later. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 6:50 am by Eric Goldman
Google Twitter Isn’t a Shopping Mall for First Amendment Purposes (Duh)–Johnson v. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Johnson suggested that nuclear war might result if Barry Goldwater was elected president. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 11:11 am by Jeh Johnson
Editor's Note: This post contains the text of a speech that former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson delivered on Feb. 6 at the American Constitution Society (ACS) Symposium at the Georgetown University Law Center. *** I am happy to be part of this symposium. [read post]
5 Feb 2020, 1:52 pm by Stephen Griffin
  Some people think the House could have won more help from the courts, but this was pure speculation. [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 12:41 pm by Donald Thompson
We should respond that these questions address the ability of a potential juror to be fair and impartial, an area of inquiry in which a trial court is more apt to commit error (see CPL § 270.20[1][b]; People v Arnold, 96 NY2d 358 [2001]; People v Johnson, 94 NY2d 600 [2000]; People v Lewis, 71 AD3d 1582 [4th Dept 2010]; People v Habte, 35 AD3d 1199 [4th  Dept 2006]). [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 7:13 am by Kalvis Golde
At the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (subscription required), Daniel Cotter looks to past precedent in U.S. v. [read post]