Search for: "Osborne v. United States" Results 21 - 40 of 102
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Dec 2011, 4:02 am by Libby Payne, Olswang LLP
Current state of the law The House of Lords decision in Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250 is the leading case in this area.  [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 11:49 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
., (collectively,“Apotex”) appeal from a final judgment enteredagainst them by the United States District Court for theSouthern District of New York. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 12:43 pm by WSLL
Osborne states the issue for this Court’s consideration as follows:Was Shawn Osborne denied effective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel failed to properly investigate and secure expert testimony thereby violating the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the requirements of Strickland v. [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 8:20 pm
From the post:In the first, United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2014, 9:52 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
The Supreme Court of the United States has since clarified this position in Riley v. [read post]
1 Mar 2009, 10:00 pm
United States (08-192) - use of telephone as factor in "facilitation" of felony of distributing  illegal drugs, when the purchase is for personal use Dean v. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 2:00 am
United States (drug felony, misdemeanor, facilitate, cellular phone) Dean, Christopher M. v. [read post]
1 Mar 2009, 8:37 am
United States (08-192) -  [reach of federal felony drug crime offense] Dean v. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 1:12 pm by Steve McConnell
Osborn at 332-39.Osborn then discusses an "alternative model," the United Kingdom. [read post]
30 Jan 2007, 12:33 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKCriminal PracticeCourt Rejects Claim That Regulation Failed to Warn Of Controlled Substance's Relation to Khat Plant United States v. [read post]
27 May 2017, 1:56 pm by Josh Blackman
Reading the Fourth Circuit’s en banc opinion in International Refugee Assistance Project v. [read post]
21 Jan 2021, 4:36 pm by INFORRM
Alternatively, such proceedings may be brought before the courts of the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence, unless the controller or processor is a public authority of a Member State acting in the exercise of its public powers. [read post]