Search for: "Stephens v. Smith" Results 261 - 280 of 830
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Sep 2010, 8:07 pm by cdw
From this weeks edition [html / pdf] Leading off this week’s is the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals’ decision in Leonard Edward Smith v. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 5:26 am by Annsley Merelle Ward
In our recent paper, we critique Abbott’s proposal whilst contemplating AI’s status as property or person.It is perhaps most interesting to compare the contrasting fortunes of the Project’s filings in Australia (Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879) and England and Wales (Thaler v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs And Trade Marks [2020] EWHC 2412 (Pat)/Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents Trade Marks And Designs [2021] EWCA Civ… [read post]
23 May 2008, 6:31 pm
Stephen Schuster of the Superior Court of Cobb County in Marietta, Georgia, and lawyers David Givelber and Nancy Lawler, both of Cohen, Pollock, Merlin & Small in Atlanta, took the audience through the esoteric but increasingly more important topic of challenging expert witnesses under the Daubert rule (named after one of the litigants in the case of Daubert v. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 9:27 am by Wells Bennett
At any rate, the burden is on the plaintiffs, under the Amnesty v. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 3:40 am by Edith Roberts
” At Ikuta Matata, Sean Smith wonders whether “Bucklew signal[s] a newly invigorated role for originalism in Eighth Amendment interpretation. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 4:15 am
Attorney for State: Stephen Creason, Indianapolis, IN. [read post]
27 Mar 2009, 6:26 pm
- Pittsburgh lawyer David Wagner of Reed Smith on the firm's Environmental Law Resource Estate of Jorgensen v. [read post]
19 Jun 2011, 1:53 pm by Daniel E. Cummins
 Conaboy of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania entered an Opinion and Order in the case of Smith v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 12:00 am
Green & Joseph Oluwole, Hein v. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 10:15 am
UCLA professor Stephen Bainbridge called the ruling "egregious. [read post]