Search for: "Case v. People" Results 3021 - 3040 of 51,995
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Mar 2024, 7:37 am by Andrew Koppelman
The pattern appears in four cases: Boy Scouts of America v. [read post]
25 May 2017, 1:18 pm by Kent Scheidegger
  The Fourth Circuit opinion in the travel ban case, International Refugee Assistance Project v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 1:47 pm
In a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court has upheld the tax credit premium assistance (subsidies) provided to individuals who live in states without a state operated health insurance exchange.The case is King v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 1:47 pm
In a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court has upheld the tax credit premium assistance (subsidies) provided to individuals who live in states without a state operated health insurance exchange.The case is King v. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 5:22 am
I'm not sure that it would, save in the unlikely case that that the facts matched Kernott v Jones exactly. [read post]
27 Mar 2007, 2:30 am
As previously reported, last month the New York Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in People v. [read post]
1 Jun 2013, 12:38 am by Mark Tushnet
Maloy (1925), a companion case to the better-known Buck v. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 5:11 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Here is the abstract: In 2012, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights handed down Sarayaku v. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 3:57 am by ISAAC RICHARDSON
Pending judgment The decision of the Supreme Court in this case will have serious and wide-reaching ramifications. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 9:03 pm
The case was remanded for re-sentencing.In People v Sweney (2008 NY Slip Op 07393 [4th Dept]) the certificate named the wrong judge.In People v Mosley (2008 NY Slip Op 07423 [10/3/08]) the certificate incorrectly listed the consecutive sentences imposed. [read post]
15 Jun 2021, 1:12 pm by Phil Dixon
The Fourth Circuit pointed to the Gant Court’s reliance on a non-vehicle case, Chimel v. [read post]
10 Sep 2018, 8:53 am
  Because if he's right that people are different, then maybe this case can't be a class action. [read post]