Search for: "STATE v KENNEDY"
Results 3001 - 3020
of 7,329
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Mar 2008, 5:07 am
Scalia outright said as much, as did Kennedy, who declared openly that what "we're looking for here, at least one of the things we might look for in this case, is a specific rule to give to the States so the State knows when counsel has to be appointed. [read post]
6 May 2014, 2:36 pm
A funny thing about Town of Greece v. [read post]
18 May 2007, 2:50 pm
United States (1967); Flast v. [read post]
18 May 2007, 2:50 pm
United States (1967); Flast v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 1:40 pm
Six years ago, in Roper v. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 4:38 pm
Supreme Court ruled in Presley v. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 5:24 am
Today in the Community we are discussing United States v. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 2:46 am
The defendants demonstrated that the alleged legal malpractice occurred more than three years before the instant action was commenced on October 31, 2008 (see CPLR 214[6]; Kennedy v H. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 10:15 am
It has long been anticipated that the Bilski v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 11:30 am
Wade, Griswold v. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 6:47 am
” Briefly: At the Volokh Conspiracy, John Elwood speculates on who may be writing the four opinions remaining from the October sitting; among his predictions is that either Justice Kennedy or Justice Stevens will write the majority opinion in United States v. [read post]
8 Feb 2016, 1:00 am
Kennedy v Cordia (Services) LLP (Scotland), heard 19 October 2015. [read post]
16 Jul 2018, 9:30 pm
Whitford and Benisek v. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 10:04 am
– Sosa v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 7:13 am
In Bilski v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 4:32 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 7:32 am
The Court issued one opinion this morning: Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy v. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 1:22 pm
Justice Kennedy, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, reasoned that the principle that consideration of race in admissions is permissible when certain conditions are met was not challenged; the issue was whether, and how, state voters may choose to prohibit consideration of such racial preferences. [read post]
