Search for: "People v. Fields (1983)" Results 21 - 40 of 216
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Apr 2016, 6:31 am by David Markus
")Overall, the language group's argument in Paramount v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 6:04 am by INFORRM
In both interviews, Dr O’Doherty was asked about the platforming of ‘people connected with paramilitaries on air’ and across local media. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 2:11 pm
Superior Court(1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 762, 772.)). [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 5:06 pm
 Despite the fact that this is a Section 1983 case. [read post]
28 Jan 2010, 9:43 am by Guest Barista
  The i.c. part is primarily of interest to people practicing in the pharma and biotech fields, where patent applications are usually filed before extensive laboratory and clinical testing of compounds has been carried out. [read post]
3 Apr 2022, 9:30 pm by ernst
  When opposing counsel, Charles Chockley, asked the plaintiff, Benjamin Sipes, "Can you tell from looking at these people whether they are colored people or white people? [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 3:08 am by Rosalind English
Moore v British Waterways Board [2012] EWHC 182 (Ch) – read judgment From time to time, the courts are called upon to explain who holds the power to order people about, and why they have it. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 11:48 am by Orin Kerr
And I wonder: If the Hartes had made their cause of action trespass rather than 42 U.S.C. 1983, should qualified immunity still apply given that there was no qualified immunity doctrine in cases like Entick v. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 1:35 pm
Hardaway, 2001 MT 252, P 57, 36 P.3d 900 (the scope of a search incident to arrest must be commensurate with underlying purposes, and specific and articulable exigent circumstances are required); People v. [read post]