Search for: "People v. Peters (1982)"
Results 1 - 20
of 93
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Apr 2024, 11:17 am
However, the day after its approval, this ordinance was stopped in court by a lawsuit led by Peter Schey and known as League of United Latin American Citizens v. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 11:04 am
But, as Greenhouse puts it, “The same facts can speak very differently to different people–and to different judges. [read post]
25 Aug 2015, 9:01 pm
The best defense of birthright citizenship echoes the position espoused by the Supreme Court in the 1982 case of Plyler v. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 9:10 pm
It's really, really hard to cross-examine a transcript, which is why those robed people in D.C. bothered to decide Crawford v. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 7:56 pm
., 56 NY2d 288, 297-98 [1982]). [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 12:49 pm
June 12th is Loving Day, a holiday celebrating the landmark case Loving v. [read post]
24 Nov 2019, 12:24 pm
Our clients are “people” and not “cases” or “files. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 3:54 am
Fischbarg, 9 NY3d at 377; see generally Eberhardt v G & J Contr., Inc., 188 AD3d 1653, 1654 [4th Dept 2020]; Peters v Peters, 101 AD3d 403, 403-404 [1st Dept 2012]). [read post]
20 Jan 2020, 6:36 am
Norris v. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 10:39 am
Approximately 2,000 people are hospitalized, and 60 people die as a direct result of E. coli O157:H7 infections and complications. [read post]
19 Nov 2012, 8:49 pm
” Wells v. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 12:01 am
In 1982, law professor Peter Irons found that the Justice Department had withheld or destroyed evidence before the Korematsu case reached the Supreme Court. [read post]
17 Jul 2022, 9:05 pm
Draft No. 1 1982) [hereinafter Draft No. 1]. [2] See Melvin Aron Eisenberg, New Modes of Discourse in the Corporate Law Literature, 52 Geo. [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 2:27 pm
Doe (1982). [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 6:15 pm
Rev. 591 (1982). [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 4:33 am
Turner v. [read post]
30 Jul 2017, 7:34 pm
In 1968, Peter H. [read post]
2 Oct 2018, 7:25 am
Peter F. [read post]
3 Aug 2020, 7:02 am
” (paragraph 12) In deciding which description of the skilled person he preferred, Morgan J provided a helpful summary of the established features of the skilled person at paragraphs 13 and 16 – 18 of the Judgment: The skilled person is the person to whom the claims in a patent are addressed and that would be a person with a practical interest in the subject matter of the claims in the patent and with practical knowledge and experience of the kind of work in which the invention was… [read post]
