Search for: "Washington v. Harper" Results 101 - 120 of 143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jul 2012, 8:53 am by Cormac Early
Over at Appellate Daily, Michelle Olsen reports on a pending cert. petition involving Miranda warnings, and Jim Harper of Cato At Liberty reports on a recent amicus brief in Florida v. [read post]
4 Nov 2016, 4:39 am by Edith Roberts
” But in The Washington Post, David Wiegel reports that Sen. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
Shipley, Conflicts Between Copyright and the First Amendment After Harper & Row, Publishers v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 7:10 pm by Kiera Flynn
Washington and that petitioner must bear the affirmative burden of proving that he did not consent to the biased juror; (2) whether a court may presume a strategic purpose from a silent record regarding why counsel made decisions that are on their face objectively unreasonable; (3) whether the court below had the obligation to decide for itself which of two equally compelling interpretations of Florida v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 11:02 am by Christa Culver
Chamber of CommerceAmicus brief of the Defense BarAmicus brief of Retail Litigation Center, Inc.Amicus brief of Altria Group et al.Amicus brief of the Equal Employment Advisory CouncilAmicus brief of Pacific Legal FoundationAmicus brief of Washington Legal FoundationAmicus brief of California Employment Law CouncilPetitioner's reply Title: Maxwell-Jolly v. [read post]
7 Sep 2007, 5:10 am
We call it 36-21 for Clemson.Update: Clemson won by 49-26 as Cullen Harper set a school record with 5 touchdown passes.This week we are : 7-2 in predicting the game winner, 5-4 against the spread.Colorado State is a 14-point underdog at home to California. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 9:30 am by Devlin Hartline
SCTLA.5 There, a group of lawyers who represented indigent criminal defendants in Washington, D.C., agreed that they would not accept any new cases unless and until their fees were increased. [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
Harper & James, in their tort treatise, said much the same thing: "conformity to the legislative standard. . .may so clearly constitute due care under the circumstances of any given case that the court will decide it does as a matter of law. [read post]