Search for: "Pike v. State"
Results 181 - 200
of 293
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Oct 2010, 7:29 pm
” Likewise in State v. [read post]
16 Aug 2020, 2:19 pm
Ass'n of Mayors v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 3:17 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, Mr Jonathan Djanogly, replied for the Government. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 12:09 pm
More on Gideon v. [read post]
14 Jun 2015, 10:23 pm
Green Hills Neighborhood Assoc. v Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County TN, 2015 WL 2393977 (TN App. 5/18/2015)Filed under: Current Caselaw, Jurisdiction, Overlay Zone [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 11:13 am
Both the Oregon Court of Appeals and the Oregon Supreme Court so ruled in State v. [read post]
3 Aug 2015, 7:32 am
In the state of Alabama, burglary is considered a Class A felony. [read post]
23 Feb 2022, 1:09 pm
Ross, 21-468Issues: (1) Whether allegations that a state law has dramatic economic effects largely outside of the state and requires pervasive changes to an integrated nationwide industry state a violation of the dormant commerce clause, or whether the extraterritoriality principle described in the Supreme Court’s decisions is now a dead letter; and (2) whether such allegations, concerning a law that is based solely on preferences regarding out-of-state… [read post]
29 May 2014, 3:22 pm
While the North Carolina Court of Appeals in State v. [read post]
9 Jan 2010, 4:12 am
Pike April 1, 2009), denying the tortfeasor's preliminary objection to the joinder of a third-party claim and a UIM claim under one caption. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 3:01 am
" But what if the Medinol case were to come down the pike today? [read post]
7 Mar 2010, 7:25 am
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case Pennington v. [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 5:40 pm
Webb v. [read post]
26 Apr 2007, 1:32 am
There is a bit of this involved in NTP v. [read post]
25 Dec 2013, 7:00 am
Schnepf v. [read post]
25 Apr 2013, 6:50 am
Coveleski v. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 11:53 am
Furthermore, neither the plaintiff nor the Barket defendants could have justifiably relied on whatever representation the deed may have contained (see Verschell v Pike, 85 AD2d 690, 691, 445 N.Y.S.2d 489). [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 9:02 pm
“Second, a plaintiff can demonstrate that the law violates the balancing test the Supreme Court announced in Pike v. [read post]
2 Mar 2022, 11:32 am
Ross, 21-468Issues: (1) Whether allegations that a state law has dramatic economic effects largely outside of the state and requires pervasive changes to an integrated nationwide industry state a violation of the dormant commerce clause, or whether the extraterritoriality principle described in the Supreme Court’s decisions is now a dead letter; and (2) whether such allegations, concerning a law that is based solely on preferences regarding out-of-state… [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 7:01 am
United States as if it put to rest the serious First Amendment concerns prepublication review raises. [read post]
