Search results for: "2" (3504 results)
Law in Russia, 16 COLUM. J. EUR. L. 261, 275 (2010). 201. See Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, (ASP 2), pt. 2. 202. See Trinidad, supra note 14, at 969 n.55.
perma.cc/M3HG -VBH4]. 2. See, e.g., Deepa Seetharaman, Facebook’s ‘Destroy Mode’—Myth or Reality?, WALL ST. J. (July 29, 2020, 9:10 PM ET
be beyond the purview of antitrust law.30 27. Erika M. Douglas, Monopolization Remedies and Data Privacy, 24 VA. J.L. & TECH. 2, 25-26 (2020
negligently with respect to the material elements of that offense.2 MPC section 2.02(1) es- tablishes that for a person to be guilty of an offense, they must
history demands that we 256. See MCRAE, supra note 16, at 240; THEOHARIS, supra note 2, at 3-27; see also sources cited infra note 258. 257. See
v. United States, 555 U.S. 135, 141 & n.2 (2009); United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 909, 921 & n.22 (1984); Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206
2191-92 (2014); Lvovsky, supra note 2, at 2000-01. See, e.g., Omri Ben-Shahar & Ariel Porat, Personalizing Negligence Law, 91 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 627, 641-42
Sections I.B.1-2; see also Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 290 (1983) (Brennan, J., dissenting) (describing “commonsense” in this context as “code
See id. at 245; see also id. at 246 n.2 (“A detection dog recognizes an odor, not a drug, and should alert whenever the scent is present, even if the
art. 50, June 27, 1981, 1520 U.N.T.S. 217; American Convention on Human Rights art. 46(2), Nov. 22, 1969, 1144 U.N.T.S. 123; International Covenant