Search for: "Kelly v. United States" Results 221 - 240 of 724
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2018, 6:21 am by Hayley Evans
   Grayson Clary summarized the Fourth Circuit decision in United States v. [read post]
20 May 2018, 12:39 pm by Todd Presnell
United States, 353 U.S. 53 (1957), protects from compelled disclosure the identity of persons, or informers, who supply information about legal violations to the appropriate law-enforcement personnel. [read post]
20 May 2018, 12:39 pm by Todd Presnell
United States, 353 U.S. 53 (1957), protects from compelled disclosure the identity of persons, or informers, who supply information about legal violations to the appropriate law-enforcement personnel. [read post]
14 May 2018, 8:08 am by Steven Cohen
United States District Court – Eastern District of Missouri – May 4th, 2018) involves a claim of products liability. [read post]
9 May 2018, 9:40 am by John Elwood
United States, 17-5684, Gates v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 6:47 am by John Elwood
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit erred when it affirmed the exclusion of the petitioner’s expert rebuttal testimony regarding his future dangerousness in violation of Kelly v. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 8:19 pm by Georgialee Lang
Big sting is illegal in the United States it has been a significant tool for Canadian law enforcement and has resulted in convictions that might never otherwise have been obtained. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 11:03 am by William Ford
The Trump administration ordered Qualcomm to postpone its shareholder meeting this week in an effort to give the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) more time to review Broadcom’s looming takeover of the American technology company, the Wall Street Journal reports. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 1:38 pm by William Ford
ICYMI: Yesterday on Lawfare In preparation for Tuesday’s oral arguments in United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
At the same time, courts recognize that every disciplinary situation is different and are pre-disposed to accord “much deference” to the employer’s determination regarding the penalty to be imposed [Ahsaf v Nyquist, 37 NY2d 182], especially with respect to quasi-military organizations such as a police department or a similar law enforcement agency [Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32].In Gradel v Sullivan Co. [read post]