Search for: "People v. Potter"
Results 181 - 200
of 272
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jun 2011, 3:44 pm
GWEN IFILL: Does Bush v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 8:05 am
As the Court explained in Bartnicki v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 12:44 pm
Potter, Postmaster General found that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act similarly prohibited retaliation against a federal employee. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 8:32 am
The Supreme Court opinion in Skinner v. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 9:40 pm
Sure, there are many people who don’t watch movies. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 5:22 am
The potter agrees, and a pot ends up in New Mexico. [read post]
1 Jan 2011, 11:55 am
Barnett The Wages of Stealth Overruling (With Particular Attention to Miranda v. [read post]
1 Jan 2011, 12:01 am
The government will attempt to kick-start mortgage lending and consumer credit with loan guarantees to banks; this will result in little economic growth, more bankruptcies, and increased governmental debt.Law and the Courts: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will affirm the trial court's ruling in Perry v. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 10:57 am
See Martin v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 10:06 am
There’s a weird failure to update some cases—the printing is current enough to include the Harry Potter Lexicon case and the (now reversed) Salinger/60 Years Later district court opinion, but it discusses the district court opinion in Perfect 10 v. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 4:23 pm
’ (Jacobellis v. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 1:59 pm
How about a mandate requiring everyone to see the most recent Harry Potter movie? [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 12:49 am
The only people to have colleges named after them in both Oxford and Cambridge are Jesus, St John, Wolfson ... and CATS! [read post]
28 Nov 2010, 4:22 am
In Payne v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 2:11 am
People whose names were placed on the reserve list should by now have heard whether they've got in or not (if in doubt, email the IPKat here to check). [read post]
21 Nov 2010, 5:56 pm
" Legg v. [read post]
13 Nov 2010, 7:43 pm
In another case this week, AT&T v. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 2:44 pm
While the amendment was aimed primarily at stamping out discrimination against black Americans, it also extends more broadly to what Justice Potter Stewart called “preference based on lineage. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 9:08 pm
In 1976, Potter Stewart, Lewis Powell, and Stevens jointly authored the plurality opinion in Gregg v. [read post]
