Search for: "Doe v. Bd. of Elections"
Results 181 - 200
of 203
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jun 2009, 12:20 am
The complaint (full text) in Jackson v. [read post]
4 Jun 2009, 3:41 am
What does all this have to with elected judges? [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 11:58 am
See Bd. of Trustees & c. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 2:36 am
"Sierra Club v. [read post]
22 Feb 2009, 12:01 pm
ADAMS v. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 3:36 pm
Bd., 439 F. [read post]
26 Jan 2009, 1:27 am
A2461
Pretlow -- Authorizes the impoundment of vehicles operated by intoxicated or impaired persons No Same asBLURB : V & T L. impoundment of vehicles Last Act: 01/16/09 referred to transportationA2463
Pretlow -- Authorizes the impoundment of any motor vehicle operated by a person who drives while ability impaired or intoxicated No Same asBLURB : V & T L. impoundment DWI Last Act: 01/16/09 referred to… [read post]
19 Dec 2008, 1:18 pm
County Bd. of Elections, 2008 U.S. [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 12:03 pm
Dist Bd. of Educ v. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:29 pm
New York State Bd. of Elections, No. 07-5367 In a challenge to state law prohibiting the use of absentee ballots in elections for county committee members brought under the First Amendment, grant of summary judgment for defendant state board of elections is reversed where: 1) the arguments proffered by the State are so extraordinarily weak that they cannot justify the burdens imposed by Election Law section 7-122; and 2) the district court therefore erred… [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 10:27 am
State Bd. of Exam'rs. of Pub. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 5:08 pm
Marion County Election Bd.] [read post]
6 May 2008, 11:48 am
Marion County Election Board. [read post]
6 May 2008, 11:48 am
Marion County Election Board. [read post]
28 Apr 2008, 6:32 pm
The law does not accept Veterans' IDs, Congressional IDs, student IDs, or work IDs. [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 8:31 am
California Wildlife Conservation Bd. (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 637. [read post]
3 Feb 2008, 10:42 pm
Bainbridge persisted in the fact that such shareholders would still maintain power over the board, due to the board's uncertainty regarding which proposals would fail and thus, would be inclined to make concessions.[11] Using Bebchuk's analysis, such concessions would be unnecessary as special interest resolutions (and nominees advancing them) have received little support in the past.[12] Bainbridge also offers the Panglossian argument, which would not promote an amendment in expanding the… [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
" U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, January 23, 2008 "Doe v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:20 am
U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, January 23, 2008 "Doe v. [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 11:28 am
Supreme Court, January 16, 2008 "New York State Bd. of Elections v. [read post]
