Search for: "Com. v. Little, S." Results 301 - 320 of 550
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2012, 4:27 am by Russ Bensing
Just how little wiggle room attorneys have in this area is indicated by the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Disciplinary v. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 3:43 am by Russ Bensing
  Much of that stems from the Supreme Court’s 1969 decision in Boykin v. [read post]
5 May 2010, 3:43 am by Russ Bensing
After the 8th District’s decision last week in State v. [read post]
2 Sep 2011, 3:45 am by Russ Bensing
This is where it gets a little funky. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 5:49 am by Russ Bensing
  The 11th Circuit rejected that argument last week in US v. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 3:49 am by Russ Bensing
  Third, there’s little empirical evidence of the need for such invasive searches. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 5:13 am
  That argument’s never made any headway:   it was rejected in State v. [read post]
26 Oct 2012, 5:41 am by Russ Bensing
  Back in June, in US v. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 2:50 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
little purple pill; not legal in most countries. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 7:05 am by Little Richard
I’ve rounded to keep the math simple:Base Salary: Biglaw Brian — $145k; Little Richard — $65kBonuses: Biglaw Brian — $45k; Little Richard — $2kHours Worked: Biglaw Brian — 3,200; Little Richard — 2,100Hours Billed (includes Pro Bono hours): Biglaw Brian – 2,400; Little Richard — 1,300Based on total dollars received and hours worked, Brian’s salary works out to an hourly wage of just under $60. [read post]
7 Jul 2020, 5:30 am by Josh Blackman
The Court's authority on this front "amounts to little more than the negative power to disregard an unconstitutional enactment. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 3:46 am
  The major impediment to doing that is the court’s 2003 decision in Westfield Ins. v. [read post]
5 May 2020, 3:54 am by Edith Roberts
At Slate, David Gans argues that “[t]he sweeping arguments for a total religious exemption” in Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. [read post]