Search for: "Brown v. State Merit System" Results 201 - 220 of 401
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Feb 2021, 1:25 am by Shannon O'Hare
  The passporting system will be replaced by one known as the EU system of equivalence. [read post]
24 May 2011, 9:05 pm
By Mike Dorf As I discussed yesterday, Monday's Supreme Court decision in Brown v. [read post]
25 Sep 2010, 9:16 am by Dave
NL – On process -v- merits, I’m not sure I see the distinction. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 4:00 am by Guest Blogger
” This continues the sordid state of affairs that existed prior to the pandemic, where hundreds of criminal cases were being dismissed annually for delay[9]. [read post]
ShareNearly 100 amicus briefs were filed in Students for Fair Admissions v. the University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. [read post]
SB 358 (enrolled and presented to the Governor September 15) would prohibit an employer from paying any employee at a wage rate less than that paid to employees of the opposite sex for doing substantially similar work—when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility—and require the employer to affirmatively demonstrate that a wage differential is based entirely and reasonably upon one or more enumerated factors, such as a seniority system, a merit… [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 4:00 am by Malcolm Mercer
It is helpful to start with the dissenting reasons of Justices Côté[xi] and Brown in LSBC v. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 8:00 am
" [emphasis added by LawPundit]In supporting Justice McKenna and in not supporting Justice Harlan, Epstein is as wrong as those who supported Justice Henry Billings Brown (who never earned a law degree) in Plessy v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 12:29 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
And even if the cause of action was time-barred, would the court then still have authority to so rule on the merits? [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 2:47 pm by John Elwood
Brown, 11-391, and Clarksburg Nursing Home v. [read post]
28 Mar 2015, 5:41 pm by INFORRM
As Lord Browne-Wilkinson said in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Pierson [1998] AC 539: A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to authorise the doing of acts by the donee of the power which adversely affect the legal rights of the citizen or the basic principles on which the law of the United Kingdom is based unless the statute conferring the power makes it clear that such was the intention of Parliament. [read post]
21 Jul 2018, 8:07 am by Orin Kerr
The first case is United States v. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 3:04 pm by Eugene Volokh
The state court agreed, and when the case was removed to federal district court (because the parties are citizens of different states), the federal court inherited the seal. [read post]