Search for: "Bottoms v. State"
Results 201 - 220
of 6,504
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Aug 2007, 7:18 am
," United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 6:09 am
The problem for plaintiff in Castagna v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 1:30 am
Rudd v. [read post]
30 Jun 2011, 8:24 am
York v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 10:05 am
The bottom line in the Health Care Cases (National Federation of Independent Business v. [read post]
4 Oct 2008, 9:26 pm
State v. [read post]
24 May 2012, 6:35 am
The key passage: At bottom, then, the defendants’ position is irreconcilable with the noncontroversial notion that Congress intended in § 1651 to define piracy as a universal jurisdiction crime. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 7:50 am
My thoughts in reply appear at the bottom. [read post]
25 Nov 2008, 12:25 pm
State Ethics Commission is not required to show an individual knowing and intentional engaged in prohibited post-public employment conductMatter of Gormley v New York State Ethics Commn., 2008 NY Slip Op 09245, decided on November 24, 2008, Court of AppealsThe issue before the Court of Appeals: Does Public Officers Law §73(18) required the New York State Ethics Commission to prove that an individual knew the alleged offending conduct was prohibited… [read post]
20 Jun 2015, 8:16 am
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Davis v. [read post]
9 Sep 2009, 2:07 am
But that should not cause one to lose sight of the fact that at bottom the question is always whether the employer made up its stated reason to conceal intentional discrimination. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:00 am
In the coming weeks and months, The Race to the Bottom will feature a series of posts that will discuss the petition for certiorari, merit, and amicus briefs filed to the Supreme Court in Morrison v. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 12:34 pm
In Smith v. [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 9:55 am
United States Customs and Border Protection. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 6:00 am
While the opinion carefully reviews a string of such cases ending with Bristol-Meyers Squibb Co. v. [read post]
2 Sep 2015, 9:30 am
The question of bias for umpires was answered in Zurich American Insurance Company v. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 4:00 am
In Whitewood v. [read post]
25 Mar 2014, 7:14 am
Minutes ago, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in U.S. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2008, 6:22 pm
The court additionally dismissed the defendants argument that an exception for using the debris as fill material was met - stating that the fill material exception was negated when the debris reached a height (70 feet) well above the adjacent land as the exception stated. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 10:30 pm
Blogpost 55/2023 In OP v Commune d’Ans, the Court of Justice determined that a rule maintained by a Belgian municipality, which prohibited the showing of any signs of religious faith in the municipal workplace, could be justified by the cause of preserving an ‘entirely neutral administrative environment’. [read post]
