Search for: "People v. Reed" Results 161 - 180 of 632
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Feb 2017, 9:55 am
"The DJ also features CAFA Conundrum: Diversity is What Counts, by Reed Smith appellate specialists Jim Martin and David de Jesus, about the controversy over the scope of CAFA's appellate review provision, and noting that the 9th Circuit recently joined "the 5th, 6th, and 8th Circuits in holding that CAFA's appellate review provision is limited to remand orders where a party claims diversity jurisdiction under CAFA" in Chan Healthcare Group, PS v. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 12:04 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  One thing people are realizing is that TM is messy. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 6:32 am by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.
What some consider to be harmless exhibitionism may meet the statutory minimum for the crime of public indecency (see People v Reed). [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 9:50 am by Dominic Ruck Keene
This may sound rather dry or technical to many people, but in constitutional terms the effect of the 1972 Act was unprecedented. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 2:58 am by Frank Cranmer
Background The Supreme Court has upheld a challenge to the “named person” provisions of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 4:26 pm by INFORRM
We owe it to the children, young people and families in our communities to address these issues before it’s too late. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:30 am by Blog Editorial
 Lord Reed refers to the position that EU law is the law of the land and the prerogative cannot be used to alter that. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am by Blog Editorial
 He is arguing that it would be unconstitutional to withdraw from the EU without the consent of the people of Northern Ireland for the following two reasons: Membership of EU part of the constitutional settlement There has been transfer of sovereignty which means that the people of Northern Ireland have sovereignty over constitutional change rather than Parliament. 15:00: Scoffield QC submits that a constitutional convention may be a constitutional rule – this is… [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am by Blog Editorial
  Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 9:52 am by Jim Duffy
Open textured v. pre-ordained weight In a lone but persuasive dissent, Lord Kerr concludes that he would have allowed Mr Ali’s appeal. [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 7:07 am by David Post
.* * This case is a close cousin of the case (North Carolina v. [read post]