Search for: "United States v. Ochs"
Results 1 - 20
of 30
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
As protest singer Phil Ochs sang about the state of Mississippi during the 1960s, the “calendar is lyin’ when it reads the present times. [read post]
20 Jan 2024, 4:58 am
Making videos of small animals being crushed by high heels may be protected First Amendment activity (really, see United States v. [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 1:57 pm
The decision to make Sweden Protestant was made during the state council (riksråd) in Västerås in 1527. [read post]
4 Jun 2021, 6:00 am
Ledamöter på väg uppför Slottsbacken efter 1921 års val [Members of Parliament walking towards the castle following the 1921 election]. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 6:00 am
The Swedish Constitution (Regeringsformen (RF)) protects fundamental freedoms, as does the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)), to which Sweden is a State Party. [read post]
23 Sep 2020, 1:55 am
Key Findings Implemented in 1991, Sweden’s carbon tax was one of the first in the world, second only to Finland’s carbon tax, which was implemented a year earlier. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 8:08 am
Lord Carnwarth gave a concurring judgment in which he commented on the criticism that had been made of obiter remarks he had made in United Policyholders Group v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago [2016] UKPC 17 in relation in relation to the necessity for a detriment to have been suffered before a claim for substantive legitimate expectation could be made. [read post]
7 May 2018, 5:00 am
” Enter the United Kingdom. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 7:11 am
Post-Och Telestyrelsen and Secretary of State for the Home Department v. [read post]
22 May 2017, 12:00 pm
Post- och telestyrelsen and Secretary of State for the Home Department v. [read post]
13 Feb 2016, 4:25 pm
Heller in which he wrote the majority opinion and Citizens United v. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 12:00 pm
The state compensates the municipality for the additional costs. 4. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 2:43 pm
Court H.R., Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, 1 July 2008, no. 58243/00, § 62 and 63; Rotaru v. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 2:27 pm
Perry v Truefitt, 49 ER 749 stated that ‘A man is not to sell his own goods under pretence that they are the goods of another man. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 12:37 pm
Cir. 1994) (citing United States v. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 8:40 am
Section 5 is a computer-specific offence and deals with persons who, without lawful excuse, operate a computer within the State with intent to access any data kept either within or outside the State, or outside the State with intent to access any data kept within the State, whether or not any data is actually accessed. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 4:59 pm
Choice, v.50, no. 06, February 2013. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 7:44 am
Damache v DPP [2012] IESC 11 centred on the constitutionality of s.29(1) of the Offences Against the State Act 1939, as amended by s.5 of the Criminal Law Act 1976. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 10:21 am
That stance is at odds with the US Supreme Court decision in United States v Jones (January 23, 2012), about which I posted yesterday. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 2:33 pm
Surveillance is of critical importance in the investigation of serious and organised crime, in determining the extent and patterns of criminal behaviour, and in the gathering of evidence to construct a case against a suspect; thus it has been described as one of the most important legal weapons deployed by the United States against Mafia groups and families (see Jacobs, Busting the Mob: United States v. [read post]
