Search for: "State v. PAUL T."
Results 1 - 20
of 4,320
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2009, 5:12 pm
Paul T. [read post]
14 Feb 2024, 1:12 pm
Paul wasn't detained at all when the officers first approached him. [read post]
3 Aug 2015, 1:00 pm
He rightly believes that Big Brother shouldn't be monitoring our phone calls but yet somehow believes the state has a right to interfere in a woman's decision to end a pregnancy. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 7:24 am
In an earlier post, I noted how defendants David Slocum and Emmanuel Paul were requesting that a Palm Beach County Judge reduce their life sentences based on the United States Supreme Court decision of Graham v. [read post]
5 May 2016, 8:15 am
In 2012, Paul Seewald, who at the time was a congressional aide and district director for ex-U.S. [read post]
9 Mar 2012, 8:20 am
By Eric Goldman Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Jun 2013, 9:36 pm
ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY v MYRIAD GENETICS – an isolated decision? [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 5:03 am
In a recent post, I discussed the Court of Appeals’ April decision in Paul E. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2009, 5:06 am
It's also consistent with the Landrian v. [read post]
5 Feb 2012, 6:31 pm
by Kenneth Anderson Over at Lawfare, UVA professor Paul Stephan talks about the ICJ decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 1:56 pm
More on House v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 3:07 pm
If true, it would be difficult to see how the prosecution could secure a conviction in light of United States v. [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 3:12 pm
This is not to denigrate state constitutional law or to disagree with Paul on the need for more work (and cocktail parties) in the area. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 4:41 pm
In that case, United States v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 3:30 am
[cross-posted and expanded with a P.S. from Cato at Liberty] Even by his standards, Paul Krugman uses remarkably ugly and truculent language in challenging the good faith of those who take a view opposed to his on the case of King v. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 11:55 am
By Eric Goldman Paul v. [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 4:36 pm
Kidding aside, Paul does have a serious point: US military adventurism doesn’t work out very well for us or our, um, beneficiaries. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 4:41 pm
More on House v. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 11:58 am
In AT&T v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:57 pm
E.g., Smith, 442 U.S., at 742; United States v. [read post]
