Search for: "State v. First Judicial District Court" Results 2741 - 2760 of 9,084
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Aug 2015, 6:07 am
The court went on to explain that[w]e `must first ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 1:10 pm by Peter Margulies
” That observation dovetails with the Court’s holding in United States v. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 8:03 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
But sometimes you have to wait to exhaust state law procedures before diving head first into federal court. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 6:14 am by Joy Waltemath
On remand following a Supreme Court ruling, a federal district court in Illinois found that the EEOC satisfied the two-part Mach Mining test because it provided the required information to an employer about a sex discrimination charge against it and attempted to engage in a discussion on conciliation. [read post]
30 Nov 2016, 7:23 am by Rick St. Hilaire
“The Guild’s arguments ... are the same as those this Court has rejected time and again,” wrote Assistant United States Attorney. [read post]
18 Apr 2022, 8:45 pm by Samuel Bray
Biden addressed this point: "Relatedly, the district court worried that the Guidance could not 'be applied on a state-by-state basis.' R.44 at 78. [read post]
29 Apr 2018, 7:41 am by Wolfgang Demino
POOLE, WALTER POOLE.No. 17-CA-473.Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.March 28, 2018.ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, NO. 760-625, DIVISION "C", HONORABLE JUNE B. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:32 pm by Wolfgang Demino
"Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief will . . . be a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense. [read post]
21 Dec 2021, 11:10 am by Eugene Volokh
The post Court Refuses to Seal File in Libel Lawsuit appeared first on Reason.com. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 10:24 am by John Bellinger
  Affirming a district court decision by Richard Roberts, the DC Circuit — in an opinion by Chief Judge Sentelle, joined by Judges Rogers and Williams — recites at considerable length the reasons for judicial caution in recognizing new causes of action under the ATS, as set forth in the Supreme Court’s decision in Sosa. [read post]