Search for: "People v. Brown (1988)" Results 41 - 60 of 139
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Apr 2018, 2:31 pm by Eugene Volokh
.): When she heard at the vigil that Brown had signed the bill, Kimberly McCauley of Sacramento sat down on the steps and cried. [read post]
31 Dec 2022, 3:12 pm by James Romoser
The two married in 1955 — one year after Thurgood successfully argued Brown v. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 2:31 pm
* The IPKat thanks Daniel Gallagher (Mayer Brown International LLP) for picking up a small but significant error in the original version of this post. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 8:03 am by Maya Angenot
Constitutional law, according to the author, is Brown v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm by Bexis
Superior Court, 920 P.2d 1347, 1354 (Cal. 1996); Brown v. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 2:50 am by NL
However, in Knowsley v White, Lord Neuberger had taken the view, albeit obiter, that it was entirely possible for an alternative interpretation of s.82(2) to be made, such that the date the tenancy ended was the date 'on which the tenant was to give up possession', i.e. on enforcement, bringing it into line with the interpretation of Housing Act 1988 for assured tenants in that case. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 2:50 am by NL
However, in Knowsley v White, Lord Neuberger had taken the view, albeit obiter, that it was entirely possible for an alternative interpretation of s.82(2) to be made, such that the date the tenancy ended was the date 'on which the tenant was to give up possession', i.e. on enforcement, bringing it into line with the interpretation of Housing Act 1988 for assured tenants in that case. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  For Sunstein, originalism is unable to accommodate cases such as Brown v. [read post]
5 Jun 2007, 4:31 pm
This is a classic example of change outside Article V, but one that occurs in a way that is far too messy to be accounted for in these theories. [read post]
30 Dec 2024, 9:17 am by Giles Peaker
They fulfil the tenant condition because at the relevant time they are the tenant and continue to occupy the dwelling-house as their only or principal home in the extended sense which has been understood in the case law since Brown v Brash and Ambrose, in 1948, if not before. [read post]