Search for: "Foster v State" Results 2201 - 2220 of 3,747
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Feb 2012, 9:18 am
The person must prove the infringement on a balance of probabilities,” the court stated in S.L. v. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 6:40 am
Thomas Charles Berg, Religious Organizational Freedom and Conditions on Government Benefits, (Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, 2009).Perry Dane, West Virginia State Board of Education V. [read post]
20 Jun 2021, 9:05 pm by Amanda Shanor
By a 5-4 vote in Tandon v. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 1:42 pm by Lyle Denniston
  The Court extended that Amendment, and with it, the exclusionary rule, to state and local governments in the 1961 case of Mapp v. [read post]
9 Feb 2021, 1:05 am by Jon L. Gelman
Through Family Fun Day, with its stated purpose of celebrating clients, their families, and the community, Friendship House received “intangible benefits” including fostering goodwill in the community, like the employer in Complitano. [read post]
3 Jun 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  But the language of the opinions was often much loftier, as when the Court said, in Wolff v. [read post]
13 Jul 2014, 8:45 pm
Although the first prong of this two-prong test is not labeled as such, it is essentially the same type of inquiry as the "predominant purpose/secondary effects" test enunciated by the United States Supreme Court in City of Renton v. [read post]
29 May 2019, 6:59 am by Melanie Fontes
State labor commissioners have deemed rideshare drivers employees rather than independent contractors; state and local legislators have imposed regulations aimed at fostering competitive parity between Uber and traditional taxi services; and the private bar has mounted an increasingly vigorous challenge to the company’s employment practices. [read post]
20 Jun 2021, 9:08 pm by Cary Coglianese
One of the most anticipated decisions of this Supreme Court term—Fulton v. [read post]
8 Jun 2016, 2:30 pm by Kate Fort
” addresses the issue of “continued custody” thrown into doubt by Adoptive Couple v. [read post]