Search for: "Held v. State" Results 2241 - 2260 of 82,195
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 May 2010, 10:16 am
 Tiffany & Co. v. eBay Inc., No. 08- 3947 (2d Cir. [read post]
26 Oct 2015, 10:06 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
The panel held that the interpretation of a Compact license pool provision in Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Cmty. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 4:34 am
The judgment, dated 22 June 2012, can be accessed through JUDIS – Tata Motors & Anr. v. [read post]
” The bench of Justices Surya Kant, Diapankar Datta and K V Vishwanathan, while relying on a pre-decided case of Javed and others vs. [read post]
14 May 2018, 8:15 am by Kent Scheidegger
There are four criminal law decisions from the United States Supreme Court this morning:In McCoy v. [read post]
4 Apr 2006, 2:53 am
I had petition for review granted by the KSC in State v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 7:16 am
Appellant was returned to the United States in custody and, although previously had been voluntarily in the United States, he was not "found in" the US at that point. [read post]
17 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Applying the lenient notice-pleading standard afforded to discrimination claims (Vig v New York Hairspray Co., L.P., 67 AD3d 140, 145 [1st Dept 2009]), plaintiff alleged that he was subjected to race discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law (State HRL) (Executive Law § 296) and New York City Human Rights Law (Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107). [read post]
17 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Applying the lenient notice-pleading standard afforded to discrimination claims (Vig v New York Hairspray Co., L.P., 67 AD3d 140, 145 [1st Dept 2009]), plaintiff alleged that he was subjected to race discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law (State HRL) (Executive Law § 296) and New York City Human Rights Law (Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107). [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 9:41 am by Amanda Frost
Maine, the Court held that states cannot be sued in either their own courts or in federal court for violating federal law. [read post]