Search for: "Word v. State" Results 1 - 20 of 40,315
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2023, 7:37 am by Unreported Opinions
In this appeal, Wilson raises a single issue, asking us to exercise our discretion to conduct plain error review of an improperly worded “strong feelings” […] The post PEARNELL WILSON v. [read post]
14 Mar 2019, 2:18 pm by Lee E. Berlik
The insulting-words statute is designed to punish offensive language that is so inflammatory as to amount to “fighting words,” which the United States Supreme Court has held to be outside the protection of the First Amendment. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 2:42 am
Regina (Kelly) v Secretary of State for Justice; Regina (Bailey) v Same; Regina (Gibson) v Governor of Wymott Prison Court of Appeal “In the criminal sentencing context, the court could read words into a statutory instrument to correct a drafting omission. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 10:26 am by Immigration Prof
Not surprisingly, the Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in United States v. [read post]
14 Jul 2014, 5:31 pm by INFORRM
The recent case of Wissa v Associated Newspapers Limited ([2014] EWHC 1518 (QB)) is an important reminder that, when pleading a defamation claim, it is necessary to set out the precise text of the words complained of and that it is not sufficient to simply state where they can be found e.g. on a particular URL. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 2:49 am by Martha F Davis
Burwell focused on the interpretation of just four words -- "established by the state" -- buried in the mega-statute that is the Affordable Care Act (ACA). [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 7:56 am by Unreported Opinions
The complaint contained less than 40 words and alleged that the State had “maliciously [prosecuted] [Arfaa], ignoring exculpatory evidence, resulting […] The post BABAK ERNEST ARFAA v. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 9:00 pm by DONALD SCARINCI
The post Cohen v California — Freedom of Expression Protects Offensive Words appeared first on Constitutional Law Reporter. [read post]
10 Oct 2006, 2:07 pm
Thanks SCOTUSBlog for putting up the link to the oral argument transcript in United States v. [read post]
5 May 2021, 4:03 am by SHG
The student quoted a passage from a 1993 New Jersey Supreme Court decision, State v. [read post]
3 Dec 2023, 5:30 pm by Steven Calabresi
 Income literally has to "come in" before it is taxable both as the word was used in 1913 and based on its etymology.The post Moore v. [read post]