Search for: "Jones v. State.2"
Results 81 - 100
of 2,686
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Dec 2020, 1:52 pm
In the recent 2-1 decision of Knight v. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 12:41 pm
The petition of the day is: Title: Jones v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 1:42 pm
In Jones v. [read post]
17 Dec 2017, 9:15 am
Jones.United States v. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 5:49 am
Teaver filed a claim in Louisiana state court under the Jones Act. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 1:58 pm
Online 57 (2012): In the oral argument this fall in United States v. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 5:17 am
In Becnel v. [read post]
30 Dec 2010, 11:13 pm
Jones, 68 M.J. 465 (C.A.A.F. 2010), and subsequent application in United States v. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 6:56 am
The case – Jones v. [read post]
21 Dec 2018, 8:16 pm
Perkins won in State v. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 8:08 pm
The policies are codified in the Jones Act (46 U.S.C. s. 688) and the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. s. 2). [read post]
28 Feb 2014, 6:32 am
Clemon (ret.), who not incidentally was the first African-American federal district court judge in the state; Judge Robert Sack of the Second Circuit; and Professors Sonja West (Georgia), Mark Tushnet (Harvard), RonNell Andersen Jones (BYU), David Anderson (Texas), and Christopher Schmidt (Chicago-Kent). [read post]
3 May 2023, 1:45 pm
Youngstown and United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 4:03 am
The case of Barrick v. [read post]
14 Aug 2013, 4:59 am
As I have noted in prior posts, and as § 1030(e)(2) states, a protected computer is basically a computer that is used in interstate or foreign commerce . . . essentially, any computer. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 11:01 am
UPDATE: Thursday, 2:40 p.m. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 7:07 pm
The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth 13-1520 Issue: (1) Whether the First Amendment or Jones v. [read post]
18 Nov 2020, 7:09 am
After his accident, Sanchez sued Enterprise and SmartFab in state court under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 3:20 pm
” Id. at *2. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 6:40 am
The Appellate Division holds in a 3-2 vote that the Clause does not prohibit such a lawsuit. [read post]
