Search for: "Perry v State"
Results 281 - 300
of 2,367
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Mar 2013, 7:30 am
Eight months later, in early 2012, in the long awaited decision in Edwards Aquifer Authority and the State of Texas v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 1:43 am
Summary of Decision issued June 30, 2009Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.Case Name: Hall v. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 6:46 am
As Lyle Denniston reported for this blog, yesterday in Perry v. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 9:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 8:08 am
Perry, in which the Court held that the sponsors of California’s ban on same-sex marriage lacked standing to defend the initiative on appeal, and United States v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 4:05 am
Yesterday in federal district court in San Francisco, Judge Vaugh Walker heard closing arguments in Perry v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 5:46 am
Monday’s coverage of the Court continues to focus on Perry v. [read post]
15 Aug 2010, 9:22 pm
Adler) There are quite a few interesting posts on the standing issues in Perry v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 7:13 am
The fate of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Perry v. [read post]
3 Dec 2011, 9:51 am
In the following case, the major issue was over communications from injured seaman Andrew Perry’s Jones Act attorney to Sea Subs, owner of the M/V Sea Sub III. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 1:30 pm
In United States v. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 1:30 pm
In United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2017, 8:56 am
And for those of a philosophical bent, check out Perry v. [read post]
26 Feb 2023, 6:27 am
" As U.S. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 8:09 am
Perry et. al. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 3:44 am
In the opinion in the latest case on that issue, last week’s decision in Perry v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 11:27 am
Park, and Joshua Perry, for that). [read post]
28 Mar 2009, 2:20 pm
In Croft v. [read post]
4 May 2010, 10:33 am
Perhaps Judge Perry should review JAC v. [read post]
5 Jan 2008, 1:57 pm
Perry, (ND TX, Jan. 2, 2008), most of the court's 36-page opinion focused on the state's purpose in enacting the current version of the law. [read post]