Search for: "YOUNG v. STATE" Results 3101 - 3120 of 8,042
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Jun 2008, 12:13 am
Special requirements for employees engaged on Federal or State contracts and grants The Federal Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690, Title V, Subtitle D) and the State Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 require that University employees directly engaged in the performance of work on a Federal or State contract or grant shall abide by this Policy as a condition of employment. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
This means that schools, libraries, and digital resources must now more than ever equip young people to bridge the distance between the promise and reality of American constitutional democracy.[13] Debate and disagreement relevant to Justice Thurgood Marshall once explained, “A child born to a Black mother in a state like Mississippi... has exactly the same rights as a white baby born to the wealthiest person in the United States. [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 5:58 am
State, 754 N.W.2d 639, 643 (S.D. 2008); Sisney v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 7:11 am
  The case is a notorious one, involving the kidnapping and drowning murder of three young black youths in Meadville, Miss., in the spring of 1964. [read post]
31 Jan 2008, 12:57 pm
The cost to Philip Morris of trying to slant jury instructions too far in its favor -- $79.5 million in punitive damages: As I first noted in this post from this morning, today the Supreme Court of Oregon issued its ruling, on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, in Williams v. [read post]
10 May 2011, 8:23 am by litigationtech
State of California (Caltrans), a difficult case in which a young lady was struck while crossing a busy road, inside a crosswalk. [read post]
9 Oct 2017, 1:14 pm by CJLF Staff
  Johnson and two accomplices gained entry to a Las Vegas home and bound four young men with duct tape. [read post]
19 Jul 2020, 4:12 pm by INFORRM
United States Blog Law Online has a post “Trump Hits the Wall of Courts’ Prior Restraint Precedents”. [read post]