Search for: "THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF OKLAHOMA, by and through its Judges"
Results 181 - 200
of 490
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2020, 4:37 am
Supreme Court that that this is not a constitutional error? [read post]
24 Jan 2020, 3:00 am
Supreme Court will decide whether presidential electors are bound to support the popular vote winner in their states or can opt for someone else. [read post]
31 Dec 2019, 5:58 am
Oklahoma, likely to decide the same issues as Murphy but with a full complement of judges. 3. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 9:02 pm
The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider a related case at its private conference December 13. [read post]
9 Dec 2019, 11:05 am
The state supreme court rejected McKinney’s argument that the Supreme Court’s recent cases required a jury, rather than a judge, to resentence him. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 7:27 am
Adams, 19-309 Issues: (1) Whether the First Amendment invalidates a longstanding state constitutional provision that limits judges affiliated with any one political party to no more than a “bare majority” on the state’s three highest courts, with the other seats reserved for judges affiliated with the “other major political party”; and (2) whether the U.S. [read post]
26 Nov 2019, 11:38 am
This is the first state supreme court to recognize the danger of warrantless access to the unprecedented types and quantities of digital data collected by modern cars. [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 6:45 am
Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Tenstreet, LLC (“Tenstreet”) of Tulsa, Oklahoma, filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Defendant, DriverReach, LLC (“DriverReach”) of Indianapolis, Indiana, infringed its rights in United States Patent No. 8,145,575 (the “‘575 Patent”) for “Peer to Peer Sharing of Job Applicant Information”. [read post]
3 Nov 2019, 6:50 pm
Supreme Court in Berger v. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 3:00 am
In addition, 16 of those firms also had increased lobbying fees from January through September of this year, compared to 2018. [read post]
14 Oct 2019, 2:58 pm
Indeed, J&J had the dubious distinction of being the first company to go to trial, as it faced off against the state of Oklahoma for its alleged misdeeds in the Sooner State. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 3:00 am
Circuit’s 2010 SpeechNow decision, we look forward to now presenting the case to a court that is authorized to overrule SpeechNow, which the three-judge panel was not empowered to do,” said Ronald Fein, an attorney with Free Speech For People. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 3:00 am
District Court Judge Anthony Trenga ruled the evidence against Bijan Kian was insufficient to sustain a conviction even though a jury convicted him at a trial earlier this year. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 7:53 am
After judgment is entered After judgment is entered, the losing party may appeal the case to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 3:00 am
Supreme Court last year allowed a lower court decision forcing Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies to disclose donors to take effect. [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 3:00 am
Supreme Court ruled in June that there were no constitutional limits on how severely states could manipulate district lines to benefit political parties. [read post]
2 Aug 2019, 3:00 am
District Court Judge Brian Morris ruled the agency did not give proper public notice before it stopped requiring social-welfare groups, labor unions, and business associations to identify donors contributing more than $5,000. [read post]
24 Jul 2019, 11:13 am
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit was sympathetic to the state’s goals, but ruled that Supreme Court precedent required it to find the law unconstitutional. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 3:00 am
District Court Judge George Hazel ruled that new evidence in the case of a census citizenship question merits more consideration, opening the possibility the question could come before the Supreme Court again even after it rules as expected this month. [read post]
6 Jun 2019, 5:01 am
Refusals to deal are generally not protected by the First Amendment In Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that a law school had a First Amendment right to refuse to allow military recruiters on its property—which is to say, the Court rejected the argument that law schools could engage in a limited boycott of such recruiters. [read post]
