Search for: "FELTS v. STATE" Results 201 - 220 of 6,498
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Sep 2023, 5:56 am by R. Scott Adams
” The sorrow, mixed with gratitude, was felt primarily for loved ones left behind, and for uncertainty and loss of control over their situation in the U.S. [read post]
12 Sep 2023, 3:33 am by SHG
But at that moment, Judge Chutkan had no idea that United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2023, 7:55 am by Ben Sperry
Below, I elaborate first on how transaction costs doom the aims of age-verification and verifiable parental-consent laws, and then consider the state of First Amendment precedent for anonymous speech as it relates to age-verification laws. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 5:44 am by Kevin LaCroix
(Please note that these figures do not include state court securities class action lawsuit filings.) [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 5:02 pm by Georgialee Lang
The respondent testified that these moneys were gifts from friends who felt sorry for him because he was destitute, and that Ms. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:16 am by Dennis Aftergut
Courts use that standard to determine whether an affidavit justifies a search or seizure because there is probable cause to believe that the subject committed a crime.In Illinois v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" Further, as the decision in Walton v New York State Department of Correctional Servs., 25 AD3d 999, modified, 8 NY3d at 191, notes, "an individual is not required to exhaust the available administrative remedy where such action would constitute an exercise in futility. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" Further, as the decision in Walton v New York State Department of Correctional Servs., 25 AD3d 999, modified, 8 NY3d at 191, notes, "an individual is not required to exhaust the available administrative remedy where such action would constitute an exercise in futility. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 10:50 am by Giles Peaker
 She then instructed solicitors ho made further representations, including that it had been held that the benefits cap “indirectly discriminated against women over men” (citing the Supreme Court decision in R (DA) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2019] UKSC 21, [2019] 1 WLR 3289). [read post]