Search for: "State v. Michael A." Results 2381 - 2400 of 13,671
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 May 2009, 9:38 am
Ferguson (chapter 4), Patricia Martone (chapter 5), and Michael V. [read post]
8 Jun 2014, 7:53 pm by Schachtman
The trial court, alas, erred in stating the relevant statistical concepts. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 10:29 am by Justin Bagdady
Kane of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado is uninterested in oxymoronic gimmicks, that much is clear. [read post]
Such state laws are often called Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, or RFRAs—named and patterned after the federal RRFA adopted by Congress after the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in Employment Division v. [read post]
by Michael Kun and Aaron Olsen In recent years, some plaintiffs’ counsel bringing wage-hour claims have have made the strategic decision to bring "hybrid" class actions; that is, actions alleging both federal and state wage-hour claims. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 7:30 am by Amanda Frost
  In a recent article, Michael Solimine argues that the Office of the Solicitor General should limit its involvement to cases in which the interests of the United States are directly affected, as opposed to cases concerning the “broader policy agenda” of the administration. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 3:30 am by Elaine Craig
Through detailed archival and interview based research, Boucai offers a delightful recounting of the first three cases to produce reported judicial opinions denying gay marriage in the United States: Baker v Nelson, Jones v Hallahan, and Singer v Hara (all of which were decided in the early 1970s). [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 9:24 am by Jonathan H. Adler
District Court Judge Paul Friedman denied the federal government’s motion to dismiss in Halbig v. [read post]
20 Dec 2022, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Here’s How They Get Around It” by Aaron Leibowitz (Miami Herald) for MSN Elections National: “‘THE Central Issue’: How the fall of Roe v. [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 4:23 am
Rather, he suggests that if the reasoning of Arizona v. [read post]