Ad
related to: cincotta chemist dickson act 2 of 2016 summary of case lawlegal.thomsonreuters.com has been visited by 10K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009), [1] is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it was a violation of the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation for a prosecutor to submit a chemical drug test report without the testimony of the person who performed the test. [2]
Lists of 2016 term United States Supreme Court opinions (14 P) Pages in category "2016 in United States case law" The following 84 pages are in this category, out of 84 total.
After a detective re-opened the 1998 cold-case murder of Andrea Cincotta in Virginia, she accused Cincotta’s former fiancée of hiring someone to kill her, a new federal lawsuit says.
Case name Citation Date Subject April 18, 1984 – appointment of Brian Dickson as Chief Justice: Law Society of Upper Canada v Skapinker [1984] 1 SCR 357 May 3, 1984 Mobility rights, practice of law Kamloops (City of) v Nielsen [1984] 2 SCR 2 July 26, 1984
FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120 (2000), is an important United States Supreme Court case in U.S. administrative law.It ruled that the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act did not give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to regulate tobacco products as "drugs" or "devices."
Jul. 21—The former operator of a Dickson City game shop and his two brothers were sentenced Friday to varying terms of incarceration for sexually abusing a teenage girl who frequented the ...
Like many other government agencies, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) uses administrative law judges (ALJ) to act as a judge in resolving disputes for the agency related to administrative law, those laws that describe how the agency is run. Prior to this case, through November 2017, the SEC had selected ALJ through an in-house ...
Case history; Prior: United States v. Dixon, 413 F.3d 520 (5th Cir. 2005); rehearing en banc denied, 163 F. App'x 351 (5th Cir. 2005); cert. granted, 546 U.S. 1135 (2006).: Holding; A criminal defendant who claims to have acted under duress must prove the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.