Search for: "Comer v. State"
Results 181 - 200
of 386
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jul 2017, 4:30 am
” In an op-ed for The Hill, Samuel Green weighs in on Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
22 Jan 2020, 9:01 pm
Comer. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 5:41 pm
FERNANDEZ, Appellant, v. [read post]
27 Jan 2010, 10:01 am
One of the cases (Comer v. [read post]
2 Jul 2022, 10:10 pm
Comer was decided in June 2017. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 3:27 am
That all came crashing down when the Supreme Court decided State v. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 5:46 am
Comer A York County jury awarded $4,750,000 to the family of a former Fort Mill High School student in a case that included products liability claims. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 11:13 am
Comer. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 9:21 am
Comer was the district attorney in Pampa from 1988 to 1992, when he resigned–and was later suspended by the Texas State Bar–after admitting that he improperly borrowed $10,000 from a drug seizure fund. [read post]
19 Jul 2016, 1:58 pm
The court first walked through its United States v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 4:30 am
In Hobby Lobby v. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 4:42 am
Comer, the justices ruled on Monday that a state cannot deny a church a public benefit – here, improvements to a playground – because of the church’s religious status. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 10:17 am
In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 2:40 pm
Comer v. [read post]
21 Oct 2009, 1:12 pm
Comer v. [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
Comer, and Espinoza v. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 8:05 am
- And that Dogge was able to copy the work as Teller had not stated that the trick was a copyrighted work. [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 9:15 am
Comer, in which the justices ruled that Missouri’s exclusion of a church from a state program intended to provide funding for recycled playground surfaces violated the Constitution. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 2:20 pm
The following response in our symposium on Kiobel v. [read post]
5 Aug 2024, 4:00 am
Comer, Chief Justice Roberts adopted a non-textual, anti-historical rule that if a state wants to provide financial support to children attending non-religious private schools, it must provide the exact same support to religious schools, despite any establishment clause concerns the state may have. [read post]
