Search for: "People v. Young (1981)"
Results 1 - 20
of 96
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Feb 2018, 5:15 pm
The murder charge this woman faces is called a “Watson murder,” so named following a California Supreme Court decision in 1981 (People v. [read post]
11 Nov 2016, 11:43 am
I've said some good things recently about good opinions and good people. [read post]
8 Jun 2017, 3:33 am
Moore v. [read post]
18 Aug 2016, 2:33 am
It is important to note from the outset that, pursuant to section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, reporting restrictions apply regarding the publication of certain facts surrounding R v Jogee, however, this does not extend to academic discussion or law reporting of the Court’s judgment. [read post]
30 Mar 2020, 5:14 pm
However, they concluded that despite clear underrepresentation of the young adults and older people as well as the economically and educationally disadvantaged that Maricopa County was largely fulfilling its obligation. [read post]
8 Jan 2021, 8:44 am
” That was in 1981. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 11:11 am
§ 1981. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 6:48 pm
When Ronal Reagan was inaugurated in January of 1981, we were about to finish up a 16 year bear market that had begin in 1966 and wouldn't end until 1982. [read post]
4 May 2020, 7:23 am
Section 1981. [read post]
2 May 2011, 4:06 am
Buck v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 12:00 am
PEOPLE v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
” Young, 291 N.C. at 568, 231 S.E.2d at 581 (quotation marks, emphasis, and citation omitted); see Godinez v. [read post]
5 Jun 2016, 4:06 pm
With Sidney Poitier as the young Thurgood Marshall.The Magnificent Yankee (1950). [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 10:49 pm
Her Majesty’s Attorney-General Claimant – and – (1) MGN Limited Defendants (2) News Group Newspapers Limited [2011] EWHC 2074 (Admin) The High Court has found that the Daily Mirror and The Sun were in breach of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (1981 Act) in relation to their reporting of the Jo Yeates murder case. [read post]
24 Feb 2017, 4:16 am
For example, see Greene v Watts (1962) 210 CA2d 103 (young child may not be capable of assumption of risk or contributory negligence in dog-bite case) or the ruling in People v Berry (1991) 1 CA4th 778 (a child under the age five is not legally capable of acting with reasonable care towards a dog). [read post]
2 Aug 2013, 4:00 am
Many young lawyers I meet only focus on relationships with people their own age. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 5:10 pm
[H]undreds of young people live solely off goods they are able to liberate from private enterprise and funds they manage to extract from the Government. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 11:33 am
In a recent landmark case, Pratten v. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 10:00 pm
In Caminiti v. [read post]
20 Nov 2024, 2:35 am
Immediately after the Supreme Court’s decisions in SFFA v. [read post]
