Search for: "People v. McKinney"
Results 101 - 120
of 131
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jan 2011, 10:23 am
Justice BhatThe Delhi High Court in Shri Rohit Shekhar vs Shri Narayan Dutt Tiwari & Anr., has examined the concept of DNA testing and the law pertaining to the same. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 9:17 am
The internet was developed by people who clearly knew and loved Adam’s books. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 11:54 am
Long, 64 M.J. 57 (C.M.A. 2006); People v. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 5:55 am
Judge Kathleen O'Malley recently handed down an interesting opinion in a consumer class action case styled McKinney v. [read post]
10 May 2010, 5:54 am
People v. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 12:47 pm
" Uccello v. [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 9:15 pm
People v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 9:11 pm
NO-FAULT – CRIMINAL LAW – FALSIFYING "BUSINESS RECORDS" People v. [read post]
3 Feb 2010, 3:26 am
State v. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 4:52 am
(The first-degree statute was amended in 1998 to overrule People v. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 11:00 am
Accordingly, assuming, without deciding, that Senator Skelos presently has standing to sue the Governor, we now proceed to the merits (see Matter of New York State Assn. of Criminal Defense Lawyers v Kaye, 96 NY2d 512, 516 [2001]; Babigian v Wachtler, 69 NY2d 1012, 1013 [1987]; Matter of Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany v New York State Dept. of Health, 66 NY2d 948, 951 [1985]). [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 1:42 pm
Remember when she couldn't name a single Supreme Court case other than Roe v Wade? [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 10:44 am
New Massachusetts companies. [read post]
23 May 2009, 4:06 am
" People v. [read post]
31 Mar 2009, 10:36 am
McKinney, Blomquist discusses the history of innovation and creativity in law — which is by its very nature is a conservative profession. [read post]
8 Feb 2009, 2:08 pm
Supreme Court therefore was required to impose a term of imprisonment upon that conviction (Penal Law § 70.08 [3] [c]; § 120.05 [7]), and thus was also required to order a presentence report prior to imposing the bargained-for sentence (see generally People v Selikoff, 35 NY2d 227, 238, cert denied 419 US 1122; Preiser, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 11A, CPL 390.20). [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 12:56 pm
" After considering the McKinney approach to the section 15 analysis, the Arbitrator observed that:"To have a law, in this case, the policy, forcing all members of the group, in this case people who have turned 65, to retire from their jobs not only perpetuates stereotypes about the value of older workers, but of necessity results, given its broad base application and complete failure to entertain or consider individual circumstances, in a loss of individual… [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 10:08 pm
Combs v. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 8:29 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, September 10, 2008 US v. [read post]
1 Aug 2008, 5:22 pm
Combs v. [read post]
