Search for: "State v. Plan"
Results 281 - 300
of 29,403
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2011, 8:21 am
According to a poll located within the Herald story (which is, in fairness, linked to The Drudge Report at this point, meaning that some out-of-state influence could have pervaded the results) 78% of respondents are against the plan. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 10:18 am
Like Miranda v. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that… [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that… [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 4:00 pm
Court Decisions on Cross-Plan Offsetting In Peterson v. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 8:42 am
In Conkright v. [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 2:22 am
See Maine State Retirement System v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 4:57 am
The undue burden precedent comes from the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 4:29 pm
Family Planning Services -- history -- United States.For a wide variety of websites, see the guide we've prepared for Beginning of Life. [read post]
28 May 2014, 8:53 am
<> Oklahoma v. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 9:23 am
The Appeals Court said, "We agree with the plaintiffs that the promulgation of the State Petitions Rule effected a repeal of the Roadless Rule, which we previously found to afford greater protections to the nation's roadless areas than those the individual forest plans provide. [read post]
28 Oct 2022, 5:55 am
In Moore v. [read post]
11 Dec 2021, 8:03 pm
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 1:27 pm
” State v. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 6:00 am
Corp. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2014, 4:03 am
The State University of New York’s Optional Retirement Plan Chapter 337 of the Laws of 1964 Fifty years ago the State University of New York was faced with a dilemma. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 11:00 am
Neal Devins (William & Mary Law School) has posted How 'Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 2:13 am
Regina (Cala Homes (South) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (No 2) [2011] EWCA Civ 639; [2011] WLR (D) 187 “The fact that the government was going ahead with the abolition of regional planning strategies in England was a legitimate material consideration for those determining planning applications and appeals even though the existing statutory framework required that each region should have a regional strategy. [read post]
14 May 2019, 4:21 pm
Loeffelbein appeared first on New York Estate Planning Lawyer Blog. [read post]
28 Jun 2023, 5:51 pm
(This is the first in a series of posts I plan to write about the implications of the last part of the majority opinion in Moore v. [read post]
