Document: United States v. Miller Et Al. Supreme Court Of The United States 307 U.S. 174. May 15, 1939, Decided. Mr. Justice McReynolds delivered the opinion of the Court. An indictment in the District Court Western District Arkansas, charged that Jack Miller and Frank Layton. "did unlawfully, knowingly, willfully, and ...
All conclude Miller is an impenetrable mess. This essay suggests the conventional wisdom is only half-right, because Miller did less than generally supposed. Part I presents a brief historiography of Miller. It argues scholars have not provided an entirely convincing account of the Supreme Court's holding in Miller, largely ...
2016-C -2013 ERNEST GUIDRY, ET UX. v. ABC INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL . ... 2016-CC-2276 STATE OF LOUISIANA, BY AND THROUGH ITS ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES CALDWELL v. SMITHKLINE BREECHEM ... 2016-CC-2182 DEBORAH MELANCON AND CLAUDE MELANCON v. JEFFERSON PARISH ...
Jun 9, 2016 ... Du Bois et al. (9) showed that complete resection had significantly improved overall survival compared with patients with optimal debulking (small residual tumor ..... The corresponding photothermal conversion efficiency of CuS NPs was also much higher than that of HAuNS and SWCNTs (99.85°C vs.
Sep 24, 2007 ... Purpose. To determine whether a 3-mm isotropic target margin adequately covers the prostate and seminal vesicles (SVs) during administration of an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment fraction, assuming that daily image-guided setup is performed just before each fraction.