Search for: "People v. Hill" Results 161 - 180 of 1,562
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Aug 2019, 6:22 am by Jon Rehm
Hill along with Lopez and Morrison, most people would agree that the Supreme Court’s law on interstate commerce is a jumbled mess. [read post]
21 Jan 2012, 9:49 am
One lesson is that people need to take the waivers set forth in these agreements quite seriously, because there is high likelihood you will become stuck with them. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 10:45 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Memorial Sloan—Kettering Cancer Center, 824 F.Supp.2d 573, 577 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (award of front pay for two years found to be warranted); Hill v. [read post]
22 Sep 2008, 4:37 pm
"On the Hill," from the Sunday New Orleans Times-Picayune carried this brief:Sen. [read post]
16 Sep 2011, 11:45 am by Orin Kerr
(Orin Kerr) Kashmir Hill writes at her Forbes blog on the good news from yesterday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing markup of amendments to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: No, Faking Your Name On Facebook Will Not Be A Felony.Legal scholar Orin Kerr wrote an alarming op-ed in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, warning people that “faking your name on Facebook could be a felony” when the law is changed. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 4:00 am
The court commented that this alteration to the videotape made what actually transpired during that incident unclear and equivocal.* In contrast, in People v Hill, a criminal action, the Appellate Division said that Supreme Court “properly denied defendant's suppression [of video tape evidence] motion, explaining that the surveillance video tape “was adequately authenticated by the testimony of a detective who, while working a second job for a security… [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 9:45 am by Elliot Setzer
Charlotte Butash provided a preview of the en banc oral arguments in Committee on the Judiciary v. [read post]
10 Aug 2010, 1:24 pm by Steven M. Gursten
Personal injury lawyers and people injured in car accidents must meet this test under McCormick v. [read post]