Search for: "United States v. York" Results 41 - 60 of 15,859
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Apr 2024, 8:09 am
Far more interesting has been the effects within the domains of Latin American politics, especially among the CELAC states (Community of Latin American and Caribbean States) including Cuba--the competitor organization to the OAS (Organization of American States) including the United States. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
” It recommended that member states adopt legislation to curtail the predatory activities of such funds within their jurisdictions.[7] Adopting such legislation in the United States is all the more justified given the importance of New York law and courts. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 11:33 am by admin
A few months after the Oregon hearings, Judge Weinstein, in the fall of 1996, along with other federal and state judges, held a “Daubert” hearing on the admissibility of expert witness opinion testimony in breast implant cases, pending in New York state and federal courts. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 3:35 am by SHG
It is our solemn duty to diligently guard these rights regardless of the crime charged, the reputation of the accused, or the pressure to convict (see Boyd v United States, 116 US 616, 635 [1886] [“It is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon”]). [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 12:25 pm by Lawrence Solum
In the United States, the overturning of the precedent set in 1973 by the abortion decision of Roe v. [read post]
24 Apr 2024, 5:57 am by Norman L. Eisen
The United States, like many other functioning democracies, is hardly immune from backsliding and lurching toward autocracy. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 7:08 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
“Yesterday, open statements were heard in the case of The People of the State of New York v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 2:04 pm by John Stigi and Kristin Housh
”  The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaint, concluding that the plaintiff-shareholders did not “actually plead an uncertainty that should have been disclosed” under Item 303 (i.e., there was no predicate Item 303 violation). [read post]