Search for: "US v. James Miller" Results 1 - 20 of 408
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Sep 2019, 1:18 am by UKSC Live Blogging
There needs to be further differentiation based on the specific prerogative power being used in each case. [read post]
31 Jul 2012, 11:53 am by WSLL
Affirmed.Case Name: JAMES HENRY and BARBARA HENRY, Husband and Wife, v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 1:25 am by CMS
Uses the access to justice principle as an example –  not a statutory power but it is established, in the case of Guardian, that it is reviewable. [read post]
21 May 2015, 10:26 pm by Patricia Salkin
   Miller v City of Monona, 2015 WL 1947886 (7th Cir. 5/1/2015) The opinion can be accessed at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1699456.htmlFiled under: Current Caselaw, Equal Protection [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 2:30 am by Blog Editorial
James Eadie QC submits that the Respondent’s case involves a direct reversal of the principles set out in De Keyser. 12.13: James Eadie QC has concluded his submissions in relation to the legitimate use of the prerogative in relation to the UK’s dualist system. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 6:36 am
Layden Jr., Assistant District Attorney James Michael Miller and former drug court coordinator Angela Marcum of attempting to obstruct an investigation of alleged embezzlement within the county's drug court program. . . . [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]
29 Mar 2020, 10:21 am by Steve Kalar
”The "Thin Ice" Band, with Victim-Company Owner Russ Lesser, AUSA Greg Lesser, and James Miller United States v. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 3:12 am by Amy Howe
At the Fed Soc Blog, James Burnham discusses United States v. [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 10:23 am by David Kopel
Part V addresses Miller and Tucker's claim that the American Founders were unfamiliar with dramatic technological changes in firearms — a claim that is refuted by Dupuy's data. [read post]