Search for: "Jones C Beene, IV" Results 41 - 60 of 115
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jun 2022, 1:59 am by Eleonora Rosati
On one hand, they’ve just been found to be naughty infringers and why should they be able continue their bad deeds? [read post]
6 May 2021, 9:09 pm by Shea Denning
The defendant was convicted in 1997 of two counts of first-degree statutory sex offense and was sentenced as a prior record level IV to 339 – 416 months in prison. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 12:25 pm
Defense Attorneys: John Archibald Dusenbury, Jr. and Louis C. [read post]
22 Apr 2022, 7:51 am by Robert Liles
(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in schedule IV. [read post]
24 Jun 2018, 8:37 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
 487.014 , following Bill C-13: Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act 2014). [read post]
30 Mar 2016, 8:58 am by Daniel Shaviro
  The underlying problem can be illustrated via a famous bit of dialogue in Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part I:Owen Glendower: “I can call spirits from the vasty deep. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 9:29 pm
The reasoning, thanks to Justice Blackmun's obiter dictum in Jones v. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 11:46 am by Orin Kerr
So the precedents have been unanimous that use of a GPS device is not a search under the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 5:20 am by Jack Sharman
[iv] In ENRC, the appellate court reversed a lower court’s ruling that had significantly narrowed the attorney-client privilege in internal investigations. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 1:23 pm by Jonathan Holbrook
As a result, there was no reasonable possibility that a different verdict would have been reached even if Exhibit #6 had been excluded. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 12:55 pm
(No previous convention had ever been held west of Chicago.) [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 2:16 pm by Marty Lederman
”  Section 204(c) of E.O. 11246 (which was not affected by President Obama’s recent amendment) incorporates that same “coreligionist” exemption for government contractors.The purpose of this exemption is to afford certain religious entities limited relief from the basic rule that employers cannot discriminate among employees on the basis of religion. [read post]