Search for: "People v. Modell" Results 121 - 140 of 4,537
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jul 2022, 2:01 am by Jen Patja Howell
When the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Dobbs v. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 9:02 pm by Fernanda G. Nicola
As a result, thousands of people left Milan to avoid being stuck in the so-called “red zone” where the lockdown would have been enforced the next day. [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 12:02 pm
Millions of people (including quite a few in the legal profession) have lost their jobs. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 1:35 pm by Steve Hall
On Tuesday, the justices will hear the case of Juan Smith, who was convicted of murdering five people here. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 3:35 am by Darryl Brown
., more market-oriented v. more social welfare and market-coordinating) do relative to each other in terms of economic growth and other measures of wellbeing.  Related literature explores the effect of different legal systems on national economic growth and other policy indicia.  Some work is more specific, looking at, say, regulation of public firms or capital markets.  Other work looks more broadly as common law v. civil law legal systems; the work on effects of… [read post]
17 Oct 2010, 7:16 am by Frank Pasquale
Lehmann describes the dubious reasoning behind the court’s 1886 fiat, in Santa Clara County v. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 10:22 am by Bob Kraft
It was a decision that has cost people their lives, and it was—like so many other harms that could have been avoided—uncovered by a trial lawyer. [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 7:00 pm
The people have made their unequivocal choice.Today we will sign treaties on the accession of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Lugansk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye Region and Kherson Region to the Russian Federation. [read post]
8 Feb 2023, 3:37 am by Heather Douglas
This is partly attributed to the altruistic model in Canada, which removes a financial incentive for people to donate sperm or eggs (ova). [read post]
10 Sep 2016, 11:31 pm
The Court’s conclusion (at 391) as to the purpose of the section – ‘to create a free trade area throughout [Australia] and to deny to [the Central government] and States alike a power to prevent or obstruct the free movement of people, goods and communications across State boundaries’ – is presented both as the product of this political and drafting history and as justification for departure from the failed interpretive models of the past. [read post]