Search for: "STATE v SHORT"
Results 241 - 260
of 22,674
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Apr 2024, 4:00 am
MARBURY V. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 10:07 am
In Bienvenu v. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 9:21 am
In Robinson v. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm
In short, there is time to give legislation a chance. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 10:45 am
Short pieces:For trans migrants forced to flee their homes, the violence continues at our border (HRF Blog, March 2024) [text]- Focuses on the US-Mexico border.Queer Asylum History: Forced Displacement and Statelessness (Refugee Action, Feb. 2024) [text]- Focuses on North Africa.Revisiting CEDAW Committee’s decision in A.S. v Denmark: Legalization of Homophobia in Uganda and the Need for a Rights-Based Assessment of Asylum Application (RLI Blog, March 2024) [text]Reports… [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 4:48 am
” The Court’s opinion in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 4:52 pm
Footnotes[+] Footnotes ↑1 Strain v. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
The HSP authors settled on a definition of “first use” as any use of a PPA product within 24 hours, and no other uses in the previous two weeks.[13] Given the rapid onset of pressor and depressor effects, and adaptation response, this definition of first use was generous and likely included many irrelevant exposed cases, but at least the definition attempted to incorporate the phenomena of short-lived effect and adaption. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 9:56 am
Leroy v. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 3:03 pm
In People v. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 8:42 am
New Article: Colleen V. [read post]
11 Apr 2024, 11:11 am
From last week's Mississippi Supreme Court decision in State v. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
Rev. 965 (2017); Atherton v. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 4:00 am
In Sails v. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 2:56 pm
Proc. 97-35, and cases like RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 2:41 pm
Other states Mis-classification of gig workers has been a major issue in numerous states. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 9:24 am
State v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
The short answer is no, but the longer answer is maybe.As originally enacted, the federal RFRA required religious exceptions to laws at all levels of government—federal, state, and local. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am
In December 1996, Judge Jones issued his decision that excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ proposed testimony on grounds that it failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702.[5] In October 1996, while Judge Jones was studying the record, and writing his opinion in the Hall case, Judge Weinstein, with a judge from the Southern District of New York, and another from New York state trial court, conducted a two-week Rule 702 hearing, in Brooklyn. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 9:47 am
Under the doctrine, named after the Supreme Court’s 1950 decision in United States v. [read post]
