Search for: "Brown v. State" Results 2501 - 2520 of 8,736
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jun 2016, 7:10 am by Amy Howe
  They issued just one opinion in an argued case: United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 2:00 pm
It’s worth noting that in his December 2016 ruling, Judge Viken cited the 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 11:51 am by Mark Theodore
The Court of Appeals accepted the case and recently issued a decision in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 6:30 am by John Elwood
Gunn, 10-1004 (held since 4/15/11 for Nicastro/Brown) Ducasse v. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 4:21 pm by Josephine Liu
  As we blogged about here, the Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year in United States v. [read post]
4 Jul 2023, 11:38 pm by Josh Blackman
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 133–35 (2000). [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 11:25 am by Mike
House disguised as a Barn In Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor v Welwyn Hatfield BC [2011] UKSC 15 Lord Hope describe the actions of Mr Beesely thus: "Frankly, the dishonesty involved in this case is so far removed from almost anything else that I have ever encountered in this area of the law that it appears to constitute a category all of its own. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 11:25 am by Mike
House disguised as a Barn In Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor v Welwyn Hatfield BC [2011] UKSC 15 Lord Hope describe the actions of Mr Beesely thus: "Frankly, the dishonesty involved in this case is so far removed from almost anything else that I have ever encountered in this area of the law that it appears to constitute a category all of its own. [read post]
21 Nov 2015, 9:36 am by Allred & Allred
Wood, Nov. 3, 2015, Maine Supreme Judicial Court More Blog Entries: State Farm v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 7:44 am by Kali Borkoski
CaldwellDocket: 10-622Issue(s): (1) Whether a binding agreement among multiple states and private companies is immunized from antitrust scrutiny under the state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. [read post]