Search for: "Hopes v. Davis"
Results 221 - 240
of 722
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 May 2020, 9:01 pm
That is, even as Republicans have largely won their decades-long war against labor unions in the private sector (allowing most private companies to quickly drop their pension plans), the public sector is the one remaining stronghold of workers’ power.This issue arose in 2018’s Janus v. [read post]
22 Jul 2012, 7:39 pm
Years later, we had the V-Roys from back east -- but that's another post entirely. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 1:57 pm
Mount Hope Church, No. 139223. [read post]
9 Nov 2017, 7:41 pm
Rev. 913, 913 (2016). [8] Sanborn v. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 2:43 pm
Davis v. [read post]
11 Apr 2018, 2:11 pm
Davis 17-6883 Issue: Whether—when the U.S. [read post]
19 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm
Term Limits v. [read post]
5 Sep 2015, 12:09 am
And please note: Kim Davis never, at any point in her public statements, claimed any such power. [read post]
27 Sep 2021, 9:01 pm
We nonetheless hope that we have something helpful to offer on these matters.Some proponents or opponents of abortion rights ground their arguments on one or the other of two discontinuous events. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 4:22 pm
United States, 435 U.S. 679 (1978) (ethics restriction on competitive bidding); Goldfarb v. [read post]
8 Jun 2022, 6:42 pm
The court rejects Boule’s argument that a First Amendment retaliation claim is similar to the employment-discrimination claim the court allowed in Davis v. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 4:50 am
Hope springs eternal. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 9:30 pm
This hope ended up in shocking acquittals of assassins who attempted lives of the most mighty imperial administrators. [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 12:44 pm
Davis. [read post]
25 May 2018, 11:00 am
Davis 17-6883 Issue: Whether—when the U.S. [read post]
18 Jan 2020, 1:32 pm
Davis won in State v. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 10:36 am
In Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. [read post]
21 Oct 2013, 4:00 am
Earlier in 2012, we reported on the case of Brito v. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 4:57 am
Lord Justice Richards agreed, however Lord Justice Davis dissented. [read post]
