Search for: "FELTS v. STATE"
Results 201 - 220
of 6,498
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2023, 5:01 am
In Hansen v. [read post]
18 Sep 2023, 10:59 pm
” See United States v. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 8:26 am
Self v. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 5:56 am
” 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
But at that moment, Judge Chutkan had no idea that United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2023, 7:55 am
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]
7 Sep 2023, 7:33 am
State v. [read post]
6 Sep 2023, 7:21 am
State v. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 4:00 am
See, for example, Mitchell v. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 5:44 am
(Please note that these figures do not include state court securities class action lawsuit filings.) [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 5:02 pm
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, 4:01 pm
” Thus, citing Genentech, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:16 am
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
" 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
" 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, 5:01 am
From Griffin v. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 1:16 pm
In Smith v. the United States, 599 U.S. ____ (2023), the U.S. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 10:50 am
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]
21 Aug 2023, 4:00 am
Haywood v. [read post]
20 Aug 2023, 12:01 pm
From Van Loon v. [read post]
