Search for: "State v. Pierre" Results 1 - 20 of 447
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am by admin
In December 1996, Judge Jones issued his decision that excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ proposed testimony on grounds that it failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702.[5] In October 1996, while Judge Jones was studying the record, and writing his opinion in the Hall case, Judge Weinstein, with a judge from the Southern District of New York, and another from New York state trial court, conducted a two-week Rule 702 hearing, in Brooklyn. [read post]
13 Feb 2024, 1:33 am by Kluwer Patent blogger
Others, like UK, Dutch and European Patent Attorney Joeri Beetz (here) and French patent litigation specialist Pierre Véron (here) have launched their own search facilities. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 6:57 pm by Jacob Katz Cogan
The International Adjudication of Environmental Disputes 30 Years Later Riccardo Luporini, Climate Change Litigation before International Human Rights Bodies: Insights from Daniel Billy et al. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 6:02 am by Bill Marler
 E. coli O157:H7 is one of thousands of serotypes Escherichia coli.[1] The combination of letters and numbers in the name of the E. coli O157:H7 refers to the specific antigens (proteins which provoke an antibody response) found on the body and tail or flagellum[2]respectively and distinguish it from other types of E. coli.[3] Most serotypes of E. coli are harmless and live as normal flora in the intestines of healthy humans and… [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 7:21 pm by Bill Marler
State laboratories can send STEC cultures to the CDC to determine the serotype. [read post]
2 Sep 2023, 11:21 pm by Frank Cranmer
The most recent example is the Grand Chamber case of S, V and A v Denmark [GC], nos. 35553/12 and 2 others, 22 October 2018. [read post]
22 Aug 2023, 9:15 am by admin
This West Chester lawmaker invited her testimony, chair says,” Ohio Capital Journal (July 14, 2021). [2] The Disinformation Dozen (2021), [3] Shaw v. [read post]