Search for: "State v. Means"
Results 2101 - 2120
of 61,243
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
The case was Reynolds v. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 12:09 pm
A divided opinion in State v. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 1:56 am
In R v May, R v Jennings, R v Green the House of Lords directed courts to consider the three questions which arise in making a confiscation order separately, even if the result was a low order. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 10:25 am
Sources: State v. [read post]
18 Nov 2020, 4:18 am
Federal preemption of state medical fee schedules and regulations are a prevailing challenge to the patchwork of non-uniform state benefit programs.EagleMed, LLC v. [read post]
24 Jan 2022, 9:42 am
In relation to Everyone In, there may be some ambiguity, and a lack of precision about statements as they were made, but this does not mean it is unlawful. [read post]
6 Apr 2012, 12:46 pm
Arizona v. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 10:05 am
Nor, in view of the methods employed to stamp out the disease of smallpox, can anyone confidently assert that the means prescribed by the state to that end has no real or substantial relation to the protection of the public health and the public safety. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am
The short version is that it’s a stone-cold loser, not least because it would have absurd ramifications (such as that it would mean Jefferson Davis would’ve been disqualified from serving in virtually any federal or state office except the presidency and vice-presidency, and that the Foreign Emoluments Clause wouldn’t prohibit the President, Vice-President, and members of Congress from accepting titles, offices, gifts or emoluments from… [read post]
22 May 2017, 3:00 am
Dutcher v. [read post]
15 Nov 2007, 2:46 am
Distribution and Marketing, Inc. v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 3:10 pm
Heather’s Legal Summaries: R v Trinchi, 2019 ONCA 356 R v Trinchi is the most recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in a string of cases related to the offence of voyeurism under s. 162(1) of the Criminal Code (see our previous post on the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v Jarvis). [read post]
15 Jan 2021, 10:23 am
Grimaldi and saying it's what Congress understands the Lanham Act to mean. [read post]
10 Aug 2023, 3:40 am
The use of defamation as a means of policing false statements, even in the area of political speech (see g., Dominion Voting Systems v. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 11:50 am
What does this mean for a future Supreme Court appeal in Perry? [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 9:50 am
The only news coverage that I've found of yesterday's Supreme Court oral argument in Harbison v. [read post]
17 Oct 2024, 6:31 am
Haver v. [read post]
15 Aug 2018, 5:44 am
The two key cases are Province of Bombay v Municipal Corporation of the City of Bombay [1947] AC 58 and Lord Advocate v Dumbarton District Council [1990] 2 AC 580. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 2:49 pm
(That doesn’t mean there are none; if the state knows where a witness is and ihttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gift can invoke a formal procedure to secure her presence, then it should do so; this is Barber v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 9:27 am
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on Monday, July 26, 2010, in State of North Carolina v. [read post]
