Search for: "WHITE v. STATE"
Results 2761 - 2780
of 11,941
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Sep 2021, 6:12 am
This case is a good example.The case is White v. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 7:26 am
Although the court ruled in State v. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 7:26 am
Although the court ruled in State v. [read post]
18 May 2025, 6:30 am
For example, the 1908 case People’s Pleasure Park Co v. [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 2:30 pm
" United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2022, 3:23 am
Here is the opinion: Green v. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 5:43 am
The most well-known case brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, to date, has been United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2024, 9:01 am
See White-Wilson Med. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
For example, I’ve long taught the fascinating case of Elkison v. [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 7:16 am
Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions [2011] EWHC 2616 (Admin) – Read judgment On 13 October 2011 Mr Justice Supperstone in the High Court held that changes to rules for calculating housing benefit were lawful and in particular did not breach equality legislation. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:01 pm
The three-judge panel there held that, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision last summer in United States v. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 3:17 pm
Water’s Edge Homeowners Association v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 4:39 am
In State v. [read post]
23 Dec 2022, 7:26 am
” * Rosskamm v. [read post]
17 Apr 2014, 8:36 am
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions <> NRDC v. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 2:36 pm
California’s affirmative action ban, added to the state constitution when voters passed Proposition 209 in November 1996, did not violate the US Constitution, the Ninth Circuit held on Monday (Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v Brown, April 2, 2012). [read post]
20 Sep 2021, 3:30 am
United States v. [read post]
23 May 2022, 6:32 am
Judge Nardini writes, "The problem with Murray’s claim is that, as the Supreme Court held in Rivera v. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 7:07 am
The Court of Appeals has ruled that the NAACP may proceed with a lawsuit against the State of Connecticut in claiming that the state violates the one-man-one-vote principle in counting incarcerated individuals as residing in the district where their prison is located rather than the district on which they presently reside.The case is NAACP v. [read post]
