Search for: "SOUTH v. SOUTH CAROLINA" Results 241 - 260 of 4,255
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Sep 2017, 5:47 pm
[Note: For background to this post, please read its predecessor here.]After the Motion to Recuse and Vacate discussed in the previous post, the petition for rehearing heaps on many more reasons why the South Carolina Supreme Court should place no confidence in its divided result in the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina case. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 12:08 pm by Amanda Proctor
The South Carolina Supreme Court recently took a firm stance on what constitutes a sufficient reservation of rights letter in Harleysville Group Insurance v. [read post]
31 Dec 2007, 12:00 pm
  Ernest moved to Dallas, while Mary and the children remained in South Carolina. [read post]
16 May 2023, 4:42 am by Derek Muller
South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP appeared first on Election Law Blog. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 2:02 am by John Day
The South Carolina Supreme Court has ruled that there is not cause of action for the negligent spoliation of evidence in that state. [read post]
16 Aug 2007, 8:20 am
On entrant was the South Carolina Attorney General Charlie Condon’s position in Reno v. [read post]
8 Jul 2021, 2:10 pm by Gregory Forman
No South Carolina case holds that due process requires allowing a defending party to obtain discovery in contempt proceedings. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 7:56 am by Howard Friedman
Ct., Docket No. 21-1431, June 20, 2023) (Order List), the Supreme Court remanded for further consideration South Carolina's appeal of a 4th Circuit decision that barred South Carolina from terminating Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood. [read post]
13 Nov 2014, 4:10 am by Howard Friedman
Haley, (D SC, Nov. 12, 2014), a South Carolina federal district court struck down South Carolina's ban on same-sex marriage. [read post]
17 Jun 2008, 5:55 pm
John Nichols wrote a great article for The South Carolina Lawyer Bulletin for Spring 2008 discussing the admissibility of expert's opinions pursuant to Rule 702, and the lack of necessity for South Carolina to adopt the federal standard described as Daubert for the infamous 1993 decision Daubert v. [read post]