Search for: "Buchanan v. State" Results 1 - 20 of 361
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Feb 2020, 6:24 am by Michael C. Dorf
 One might object to the foregoing on the ground that Imbler is not rooted in Article II, because it involves a state defendant. [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 9:01 pm by Neil H. Buchanan
Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union did not simply allow arbitrary actions by state actors—or not only that. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 6:00 am by Brian Gallini
In 1984, the Supreme Court created a now well-known “good faith” exception to the exclusionary rule in United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 10:29 am by Neil H. Buchanan
   During the debate prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in NFIB v. [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
Contrast that system with the sclerotic system in the US, in which the Constitution is entrenched against change by the requirement of 2/3 majorities in each house of Congress and ratification by 3/4 of state legislatures. [read post]
25 Jul 2019, 4:31 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Accepting these allegations as true, plaintiff adequately stated a cause of action for legal malpractice (see New York State Workers’ Compensation Bd. v Any-Time Home Care Inc., 156 AD3d at 1046; New York State Workers’ Compensation Bd. v Program Risk Mgt., Inc., 150 AD3d at 1593; NYAHSA Servs., Inc., Self-Ins. [read post]