Search for: "State v. Kay"
Results 201 - 220
of 573
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Sep 2014, 12:39 pm
In 1967, we represented Mildred and Richard Loving in their successful fight to end state bans on inter-racial marriage, in the landmark case Loving v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 8:51 am
In 1993, this practice led to the Utah Supreme Court ruling in East Jordan Irrigation Company v Morgan, commonly known as "the East Jordan Case." [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 8:56 am
In United States v. [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 1:42 pm
”For a more recent, but factually rather different, § 403 case, see McMahon v. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 5:01 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) Antreaun Rice v. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 8:34 am
Specifically Judge Kay stated as follows: This court is aware that quantum of damage awards in cases similar to the one at bar vary dramatically. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 2:53 am
Rumour has it that Dixon is off to the ECHR; Kay v UK is on the horizon; and then there's the CA bust-up over gateway b let alone the nine-person SC in Pinnock. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 2:53 am
Rumour has it that Dixon is off to the ECHR; Kay v UK is on the horizon; and then there's the CA bust-up over gateway b let alone the nine-person SC in Pinnock. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 7:56 am
Kay Bailey Hutchison). [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 10:50 am
Kay, PC, 650 F.3d 993 (3d Cir. 2011) Id, at 1003 N.J. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 8:21 am
Kai Ryssdal of Marketplace interviews Dahlia Lithwick on this Term’s business-related cases. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 9:34 am
—Tony Kanal 1Wailua Associates v. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 1:53 pm
" Maybe Administrator Babbitt got it right when he concluded his remarks by stating that "if you think the safety bar is set too high, your sights are set way too low. [read post]
15 Feb 2009, 3:55 am
LEXIS 9298 (ED CA, Jan. 28, 2009), a federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of an inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA challenge to the state Department of Corrections hair-length regulations.In Kay v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 4:05 pm
Layton v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 2:40 am
The Court cites McCarthy v SoS for Home Department and Abdirahman v SoS for Work and Pensions in support, and explained (politely) a comment made by Kay LJ in Kaczmarek v SoS for Work and Pensions (at [23]) as well as R(Badar) v Ealing LBC (irrelevant as right of residence was not contested). [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 2:40 am
The Court cites McCarthy v SoS for Home Department and Abdirahman v SoS for Work and Pensions in support, and explained (politely) a comment made by Kay LJ in Kaczmarek v SoS for Work and Pensions (at [23]) as well as R(Badar) v Ealing LBC (irrelevant as right of residence was not contested). [read post]
12 May 2012, 4:51 am
After two days of argument (spread over three days due to the State Opening of Parliament) judgment was reserved. [read post]
4 Dec 2009, 12:30 am
What qualifies as "property" and the right to exclude: While the consent of individual officials representing the United States cannot "estop" the United States, see Montana v. [read post]
